[Buildroot] More maintainers
Peter Korsgaard
peter at korsgaard.com
Sat Sep 5 17:25:07 UTC 2020
>>>>> "Adam" == Adam Duskett <aduskett at gmail.com> writes:
Hi,
>> >> So yes, lets please discuss concrete improvements to the automation
>> >> checks we already have or ways to get more people to help review rather
>> >> than yet another discussion about the merits of pull requests versus
>> >> emails.
>>
> Commit 9faba29108e74eb4acab21f5919dfab0288b23ac broke systemd with
> busybox in the stock Buildroot configuration.
Indeed, like discussed last week:
http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2020-August/290576.html
And announced as a reply to the 2020.02.5 announcment:
http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2020-August/290584.html
> An incredibly simple test:
> Download the tarball
> select systemd
> make
> Not only was this incredibly embarrassing yesterday when I was showing a
> client how to update Buildroot, but it could have been prevented with a basic
> CI/CD test.
Improvements to our test automation are always welcome. This has still
not triggered on the autobuilders:
http://autobuild.buildroot.net/?branch=2020.02.x&reason=busybox-%
> I don't have to mention how much guff I would have received from
> the maintainers if I had submitted a patch like that without a simple test.
Accidents happen, certainly with such hidden dependencies - Which is
part of the reason we have the autobuilders. For all the ~40 LTS
releases I have done, this is afaik the first time we had such an issue.
>> > Probably with a very extensive test matrix, it could be possible to
>> > allow very small patches to be merged automatically to "next" with a
>> > qualifying # of reviewed-by?
>>
>> More testing is certainly good, but aren't those "very small patches"
>> already getting applied to next pretty fast? Actually applying a patch
>> is a single git command so that doesn't take a long time.
>>
> I have had several small patches in the past sit for months if not almost years
> before being applied. Including an OpenJDK bump that took over 3 months.
> In fact, just looking at the list right now, a simple patch that has
> been reviewed
> AND tested is still sitting from 2019:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20191029095736.16586-1-fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com/
> Here's another:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20191109185512.24139-2-jeremy.rosen@smile.fr/
That patch series was discussed in detail in Lyon last year, and should
probably just be marked as rejected.
> Here's a simple test:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20191112162325.529637-2-m.niestroj@grinn-global.com/
> So this is demonstrably false, which is why a lot of us are growing
> more frustrated.
Nobody is claiming that we are perfect or that there isn't a patch
backlog, but given that we merge ~500 patches/month I still would say
that it IS generally true.
Anyway, Thomas has sent out a mail for a live discussion for next week,
so lets take the discussion there.
--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
More information about the buildroot
mailing list