[Python-Dev] My thinking about the development process

[R. David Murray]

On Mon, 08 Dec 2014 12:27:23 -0800, "Jim J. Jewett" <jimjjewett at gmail.com> wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > 4. Contributor creates account on bugs.python.org and signs the
> >   [contributor agreement](https://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/)
> 
> Is there an expiration on such forms?  If there doesn't need to be
> (and one form is good for multiple tickets), is there an objection
> (besides "not done yet") to making "signed the form" part of the bug
> reporter account, and required to submit to the CI process?  (An "I
> can't sign yet, bug me later" option would allow the current workflow
> without the "this isn't technically a patch" workaround for "small enough"
> patches from those with slow-moving employers.)

No expiration.  Whether or not we have a CLA from a given tracker id
is recorded in the tracker.  People also get reminded to submit a CLA
if they haven't yet but have submitted a patch.

> > At best core developers tell a contributor "please send your PR
> > against 3.4", push-button merge it, update a local clone, merge from
> > 3.4 to default, do the usual stuff, commit, and then push;
> 
> Is it common for a patch that should apply to multiple branches to fail
> on some but not all of them?

Currently?  Yes when 2.7 is involved.  If we fix NEWS, then it won't
be *common* for maint->default, but it will happen.

> In other words, is there any reason beyond "not done yet" that submitting
> a patch (or pull request) shouldn't automatically create a patch per
> branch, with pushbuttons to test/reject/commit?

Not Done Yet (by any of the tools we know about) is the only reason I'm
aware of.

> > Our code review tool is a fork that probably should be
> > replaced as only Martin von Loewis can maintain it.
> 
> Only he knows the innards, or only he is authorized, or only he knows
> where the code currently is/how to deploy an update?

Only he knows the innards.  (Although Ezio has made at least one patch
to it.)  I think Guido's point was that we (the community) shouldn't be
maintaining this private fork of a project that has moved on well beyond
us; instead we should be using an active project and leveraging
its community with our own contributions (like we do with Roundup).

> I know that there were times in the (not-so-recent) past when I had
> time and willingness to help with some part of the infrastructure, but
> didn't know where the code was, and didn't feel right making a blind
> offer.

Yeah, that's something that's been getting better lately (thanks,
infrastructure team), but where to get the info is still not as clear as
would be optimal.

--David