[arch-dev-public] Web based signoffs
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers, Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev. https://dev.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ This is a thoroughly un-tested beta version that will probably break. I'm far too lazy/important/busy (depending how you perceive my levels of ambition/arrogance/available time...) to do my own testing, so please break it and report bugs. It works pretty simple. All packages in testing are listed in the signoff page. If you test a package and deem it usable you can click the "signoff" link to sign off for it. If two or more people sign off for a package, the package 'approved' flag is set to true. Its up to the maintainer whether or not he wants to move the package to core/extra before it is approved, or alternatively if you want to wait for more than two people to signoff or whatever. Each person who signs off is listed, so you can even judge the quality of the signoff based on how much you believe the person really tested it. I mean you could have figured that out for your self in less time than it took me to write it, but seriously, isn't documentation wonderful? Hope you all enjoy. Dusty
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008, Dusty Phillips wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
https://dev.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
This is a thoroughly un-tested beta version that will probably break. I'm far too lazy/important/busy (depending how you perceive my levels of ambition/arrogance/available time...) to do my own testing, so please break it and report bugs.
It works pretty simple. All packages in testing are listed in the signoff page. If you test a package and deem it usable you can click the "signoff" link to sign off for it. If two or more people sign off for a package, the package 'approved' flag is set to true.
The 'approved' flag for a package (both i686 and x86_64 versions) should be set to true when the package has received at least one signoff per arch. Apart from that bug, it looks nice and it would be more convenient than the ML expecially to keep track of the signoffs. Its up to
the maintainer whether or not he wants to move the package to core/extra before it is approved, or alternatively if you want to wait for more than two people to signoff or whatever. Each person who signs off is listed, so you can even judge the quality of the signoff based on how much you believe the person really tested it.
I mean you could have figured that out for your self in less time than it took me to write it, but seriously, isn't documentation wonderful?
Hope you all enjoy.
Dusty
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Eric Belanger <belanger@astro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008, Dusty Phillips wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
https://dev.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
This is a thoroughly un-tested beta version that will probably break. I'm far too lazy/important/busy (depending how you perceive my levels of ambition/arrogance/available time...) to do my own testing, so please break it and report bugs.
It works pretty simple. All packages in testing are listed in the signoff page. If you test a package and deem it usable you can click the "signoff" link to sign off for it. If two or more people sign off for a package, the package 'approved' flag is set to true.
The 'approved' flag for a package (both i686 and x86_64 versions) should be set to true when the package has received at least one signoff per arch.
Apart from that bug, it looks nice and it would be more convenient than the ML expecially to keep track of the signoffs.
Yes and no. I can't think of an easy way to record the packager as having signed off, but it would be nice to know who exactly signed off rather than just doing the assumed signoff. For instance, I have built x86_64 packages before that I have no possible way of signing off on (GUI application or something), and in that case I do want multiple signoffs and my implicit one doesn't exist. However, I can't think of an elegant way to do this. Anyone else? -Dan
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008, Dan McGee wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Eric Belanger <belanger@astro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008, Dusty Phillips wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
https://dev.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
This is a thoroughly un-tested beta version that will probably break. I'm far too lazy/important/busy (depending how you perceive my levels of ambition/arrogance/available time...) to do my own testing, so please break it and report bugs.
It works pretty simple. All packages in testing are listed in the signoff page. If you test a package and deem it usable you can click the "signoff" link to sign off for it. If two or more people sign off for a package, the package 'approved' flag is set to true.
The 'approved' flag for a package (both i686 and x86_64 versions) should be set to true when the package has received at least one signoff per arch.
Apart from that bug, it looks nice and it would be more convenient than the ML expecially to keep track of the signoffs.
Yes and no. I can't think of an easy way to record the packager as having signed off, but it would be nice to know who exactly signed off rather than just doing the assumed signoff. For instance, I have built x86_64 packages before that I have no possible way of signing off on (GUI application or something), and in that case I do want multiple signoffs and my implicit one doesn't exist.
However, I can't think of an elegant way to do this. Anyone else?
-Dan
We could just stop assuming that the packager has automatically signed off and toggle the 'approved' flags after each arch has received 2 signoffs. Then, the packager will need to go to the web page and signoff his own packages (if he could test them, of course). Eric -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
On Sat, 2008-08-16 at 13:50 -0400, Dusty Phillips wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
https://dev.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
This is a thoroughly un-tested beta version that will probably break. I'm far too lazy/important/busy (depending how you perceive my levels of ambition/arrogance/available time...) to do my own testing, so please break it and report bugs.
It works pretty simple. All packages in testing are listed in the signoff page. If you test a package and deem it usable you can click the "signoff" link to sign off for it. If two or more people sign off for a package, the package 'approved' flag is set to true. Its up to the maintainer whether or not he wants to move the package to core/extra before it is approved, or alternatively if you want to wait for more than two people to signoff or whatever. Each person who signs off is listed, so you can even judge the quality of the signoff based on how much you believe the person really tested it.
I mean you could have figured that out for your self in less time than it took me to write it, but seriously, isn't documentation wonderful?
Hope you all enjoy.
Dusty OK, I have jsut used it, and it works great. I really think it is a great idea. Two thumbs up for our Django coder.
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too. I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
2008/8/17 Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org>:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
I can easily add 'unsignoff' functionality, but I'm not sure its necessary; this isn't the general public we're talking about and an e-mail to the maintainer saying "Ignore my signoff on package x" might suffice. But its up to you guys, its probably a matter of 10 minutes to add a view for removing a signoff. Dusty
2008/8/17 Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org>:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
I can easily add 'unsignoff' functionality, but I'm not sure its necessary; this isn't the general public we're talking about and an e-mail to the maintainer saying "Ignore my signoff on package x" might suffice.
But its up to you guys, its probably a matter of 10 minutes to add a view for removing a signoff.
Dusty Well, that would be a great addition, and also, packages from core are
On Sun, 2008-08-17 at 13:39 -0400, Dusty Phillips wrote: the only ones supposed to be put through the signoff proccess. I know this one might be a bit harder to implement, maybe not.
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008, Eduardo Romero wrote:
2008/8/17 Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org>:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
I can easily add 'unsignoff' functionality, but I'm not sure its necessary; this isn't the general public we're talking about and an e-mail to the maintainer saying "Ignore my signoff on package x" might suffice.
But its up to you guys, its probably a matter of 10 minutes to add a view for removing a signoff.
Dusty Well, that would be a great addition, and also, packages from core are
On Sun, 2008-08-17 at 13:39 -0400, Dusty Phillips wrote: the only ones supposed to be put through the signoff proccess. I know this one might be a bit harder to implement, maybe not.
We should keep the packages from extra on the list as it can always be useful for packages like the servers or the kernel modules. What would be nice would be to seperate the core packages from the extra packages and to have the core packages listed first as they are the ones requiring signoffs. If it's too hard/impossible to do, then keeping them in alphabetical order is fine. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Eduardo Romero <k3nsai@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/17 Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org>:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
I can easily add 'unsignoff' functionality, but I'm not sure its necessary; this isn't the general public we're talking about and an e-mail to the maintainer saying "Ignore my signoff on package x" might suffice.
But its up to you guys, its probably a matter of 10 minutes to add a view for removing a signoff.
Dusty Well, that would be a great addition, and also, packages from core are
On Sun, 2008-08-17 at 13:39 -0400, Dusty Phillips wrote: the only ones supposed to be put through the signoff proccess. I know this one might be a bit harder to implement, maybe not.
If it goes through testing, I don't think anyone is going to object to others signing off on it- if anything it will reassure them that everything went OK. The rule is not "only core packages get signed off on", the rule is "core packages *must* get signed off on". -Dan
On Sun, 2008-08-17 at 18:14 -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Eduardo Romero <k3nsai@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/17 Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org>:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
I can easily add 'unsignoff' functionality, but I'm not sure its necessary; this isn't the general public we're talking about and an e-mail to the maintainer saying "Ignore my signoff on package x" might suffice.
But its up to you guys, its probably a matter of 10 minutes to add a view for removing a signoff.
Dusty Well, that would be a great addition, and also, packages from core are
On Sun, 2008-08-17 at 13:39 -0400, Dusty Phillips wrote: the only ones supposed to be put through the signoff proccess. I know this one might be a bit harder to implement, maybe not.
If it goes through testing, I don't think anyone is going to object to others signing off on it- if anything it will reassure them that everything went OK.
The rule is not "only core packages get signed off on", the rule is "core packages *must* get signed off on".
-Dan OK, got it, I think there is a lot of catching up I have to do.
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
Maybe if you accidently signoff on a package you should be responsible for actually testing the package then, thus getting rid of the necessity to unsignoff.
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
Maybe if you accidently signoff on a package you should be responsible for actually testing the package then, thus getting rid of the necessity to unsignoff.
Sometimes that's not possible, for example if its a kernel module for a wireless card you don't have or if you signed off for x86_64 when all your machines are i686. I could have implemented the feature in less time than its taken to discuss it, guys. Its not a big deal to send an e-mail if you screw up. Besides, arch devs don't make mistakes. Or if you do, just blame Allan! Dusty
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
Maybe if you accidently signoff on a package you should be responsible for actually testing the package then, thus getting rid of the necessity to unsignoff.
Sometimes that's not possible, for example if its a kernel module for a wireless card you don't have or if you signed off for x86_64 when all your machines are i686.
Well then, you'd better buy the hardware dammit! You took responsibility when you clicked that button! You should be more careful where you click you dirty button pusher!
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
Maybe if you accidently signoff on a package you should be responsible for actually testing the package then, thus getting rid of the necessity to unsignoff.
Sometimes that's not possible, for example if its a kernel module for a wireless card you don't have or if you signed off for x86_64 when all your machines are i686.
Well then, you'd better buy the hardware dammit! You took responsibility when you clicked that button! You should be more careful where you click you dirty button pusher!
How about we do this: If you mess up you can e-mail me asking me to delete the signoff entry. If I get enough of these e-mails to piss me off I will either have the AOL kick the person(s) involved off the dev team for sloppy archmanship, or I will add unsignoff functionality. =) Dusty
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
Maybe if you accidently signoff on a package you should be responsible for actually testing the package then, thus getting rid of the necessity to unsignoff.
Sometimes that's not possible, for example if its a kernel module for a wireless card you don't have or if you signed off for x86_64 when all your machines are i686.
Well then, you'd better buy the hardware dammit! You took responsibility when you clicked that button! You should be more careful where you click you dirty button pusher!
How about we do this: If you mess up you can e-mail me asking me to delete the signoff entry. If I get enough of these e-mails to piss me off I will either have the AOL kick the person(s) involved off the dev team for sloppy archmanship, or I will add unsignoff functionality. =)
We are basing our new website on America Online? Awesome!!! Do we get to post on the newsgroups too?
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/8/18 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org>:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Dusty Phillips <buchuki@gmail.com> wrote: > Esteemed ArchLinux Developers, > > Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and > partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of > boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based > signoff mechanism into archweb_dev. > > https://dev.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
Nice work! I think this is a great idea too.
I only see one potential problem...what if someone accidentaly clicks signoff on the wrong package? For instance, I didn't really test the cracklib, but I couldn't resist the urge to click it!
Maybe if you accidently signoff on a package you should be responsible for actually testing the package then, thus getting rid of the necessity to unsignoff.
Sometimes that's not possible, for example if its a kernel module for a wireless card you don't have or if you signed off for x86_64 when all your machines are i686.
Well then, you'd better buy the hardware dammit! You took responsibility when you clicked that button! You should be more careful where you click you dirty button pusher!
How about we do this: If you mess up you can e-mail me asking me to delete the signoff entry. If I get enough of these e-mails to piss me off I will either have the AOL kick the person(s) involved off the dev team for sloppy archmanship, or I will add unsignoff functionality. =)
We are basing our new website on America Online? Awesome!!! Do we get to post on the newsgroups too?
I was always so jealous about the AOL keywords. I wish my internet had keywords!
Dusty Phillips wrote:
Esteemed ArchLinux Developers,
Partially because Aaron asked for it and thinks it is cool and partially because all those [signoff] e-mails in my inbox are kind of boring to me (as a non-packager), I have implemented a web based signoff mechanism into archweb_dev.
<snip> Do we really need the owner field in there? It is not as if anybody really adopts packages in testing anyway... Otherwise looks good to me. Glad I could crowd the list so thoroughly on its first day! Allan
participants (7)
-
Allan McRae
-
Dan McGee
-
Dusty Phillips
-
Eduardo Romero
-
Eric Belanger
-
Jason Chu
-
Thayer Williams