-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 06/04/2012 03:25 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > While I do grok the potential issue of someone being a hog > (specifically via blasting commit by commit rather than building up > work locally, then pushing it in chunks), frankly... I'm not that > concerned about it, and would rather deal w/ it if/when it occurs. > The nature of our commits for the most part are standalone from > others- that's not true of the kernel/mozilla, thus why I don't > think their issues are necessarily ours. True.
We already have maintainers and herds as responsible (sole editors) entities for locations (packages). But, we have arch teams editing ebuild/KEYWORDS, which alters Manifest/EBUILD lines. Resulting in potential clashes (not fast-forwardable), if the herd or maintainer does bumps or cleanups. Will these Manifest lines (and the arch team inflicted Manifest changes)? And we have orphaned (maintainer-needed) and "everyone can fix it" herds like desktop-*). This results in a large group of potential bug-fixers (committers) and the potential of concurrent edits. This can be managed by using bugzilla IN_PROGRESS as a lock state, but I thats not very practicable/needs disciplin/is annoying. But this is no regression compared to CVS, we just need to signal clashed. Last assumed hot spot imho is package.mask with ~700 commits in the last 4.5 months (one every 4.6 hours) and ~620 commits in **/package.use.mask. Not that much. According to robbat2 data (gentoo-commit tarball) we have ~400k commits in gentoo-x86 (w/o proj,xml) in 4.7 years, that's 6.2 per hour averaged. But I've to look into the data to see trends (# developers, daylight). Michael - -- Gentoo Dev http://xmw.de/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iF4EAREIAAYFAk/NOFQACgkQknrdDGLu8JARlwEAldk7GAEqCrd5mSsDgC69e5uQ aqivvwbDpNWSgfwJqwUA/jjlByEncXXPVia11BALSdDf1elrL/3qAf5ktCtxx/m0 =pJFc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
