llvm dev - Apr 2010 - [LLVMdev] Call for Help: Testing

On Wednesday 07 April 2010 13:44:44 David Greene wrote:
> > Also, I should note that master bug in question was *explicitly*
> > mentioned in Tanya's 2.7 prerelease 1 e-mail sent on March, 17.
> > Have you seen this e-mail?
>
> Hmm, I'm sure I got it.  I must have missed it.  I can't read the
list
> every day and after a few days things get pretty backed up.
I don't see it in the gmane archives but that doesn't matter.  Looking
back
at those archives, I recall that I was in the middle of iterating on a
patch to add some debug capability to LLVM.  I was focused on that and
could easily miss a bug reference like that.  I wasn't focusing on the
2.7 release at the time, quite frankly.

People are going to miss e-mails.  That's a fact of life.

Perhaps weekly status updates with tracking bug number after the release
branch is made would be helpful, along with daily updates as we get
closer to the scheduled release date.

I can't say I would have been able to devote loads of time to fixing bugs
at that point (I could have helped a bit, I'm sure) but having the
information
out there and accessible (linked from the project home page, etc.) would help
many people to get involved.

                                  -Dave

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:44 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 April 2010 12:53:48 Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
> > Hi, David
> >
> > > To say that "It can't be the same people fixing the bugs
for every
> > > release" discounts a lot of good, hard work put in by a lot
of people.
> > > There wasn't a lot for "the community" to do before
late last week
> except
> > > run tests, which in fact a number of people did.
> >
> > Why? Prerelease 1 tarballs are available for at least 3 weeks. PR6623
> > was entered into bugzilla at March, 20, etc., etc., etc.
>
> But where was it posted to let people know about it?
>
It was posted to the dev mailing lists. In fact, that's the *exact* same
place that your email was posted. How can you claim that this is impossible
or even hard to find, and yet send emails to it expecting people to find,
read, and take action based on them? (Remember, your subject line was 'Call
for help'...)

> > > Did I miss an announcement of PR6586 somewhere?  The first I knew
about
> > > it was mid last week.  Maybe I missed the posting on this mailing
list
> > > about it. It's been open for almost a month.  Without knowing
about
> that
> > > bug, it's pretty tough for people to do anything about it.
> >
> > It's pretty strange to hear about this from you. I hoped everyone
who
> > worked with llvm for some non-trivial period of time knows about
> > "master" bug habits in the LLVM bugzilla. Such bugs were
created for
>
> Nope.  I've seen master bugs with other projects, but I don't see
> anything on the LLVM website to direct me.
>
Seriously? http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=llvm+2.7+release+master+bug

1st link: the gmane archive you claim to have looked at, with the bug number
in the snippet
4th link: the bugs mailing list email noting the creation of the bug, with
all of its contents and a link to bugzilla

I hadn't seen those bugs.  And even if I had, what about newer
people?
>
> > Also, I should note that master bug in question was *explicitly*
> > mentioned in Tanya's 2.7 prerelease 1 e-mail sent on March, 17.
> > Have you seen this e-mail?
>
> Hmm, I'm sure I got it.  I must have missed it.  I can't read the
list
> every day and after a few days things get pretty backed up.
>
I'm not sure why you think burying links that are only relevant for a narrow
window of time in a long-lived webpage is more discoverable than email.
Also, unless you are subscribed to the commit list, the load from llvmdev is
very modest.

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:52 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 April 2010 13:44:44 David Greene wrote:
>
I don't see it in the gmane archives but that doesn't
matter.
>
I find this hard to believe. Did you really look? There are exactly two
links in the email, one of them to the bug. Let's use the fancy powers of
search to help out:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/8084/match=release+master+bug

People are going to miss e-mails.  That's a fact of
life.
>
> Perhaps weekly status updates with tracking bug number after the release
> branch is made would be helpful, along with daily updates as we get
> closer to the scheduled release date.
>
The solution to people not reading email is not to send them more email.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100407/0f783348/attachment.html>

On Wednesday 07 April 2010 15:36:28 Chandler Carruth wrote:
> > But where was it posted to let people know about it?
>
> It was posted to the dev mailing lists. In fact, that's the *exact*
same
> place that your email was posted. How can you claim that this is impossible
> or even hard to find, and yet send emails to it expecting people to find,
> read, and take action based on them? (Remember, your subject line was
'Call
> for help'...)
I didn't say "impossible," but it is difficult to find.  I
couldn't find it
with a gmane search, for example.

Hey, I missed some of the e-mails and I stand corrected.  It happens.

Not sure why the anxiety level seems to be increasing.
> > Nope.  I've seen master bugs with other projects, but I don't
see
> > anything on the LLVM website to direct me.
>
> Seriously? http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=llvm+2.7+release+master+bug
Please, let's keep this a friendly place, ok?

I didn't type that into google.  I typed "llvmdev 2.7" and
"llvmdev 6586."
The latter only brings up the last e-mail Tanya posted.  I did multiple
gmane searches with no luck.

We can't expect everyone to think of googling exactly the same thing.

I'm only relating my experience.  I had hoped this would be a helpful 
set of suggestions.
> > Hmm, I'm sure I got it.  I must have missed it.  I can't read
the list
> > every day and after a few days things get pretty backed up.
>
> I'm not sure why you think burying links that are only relevant for a
> narrow window of time in a long-lived webpage is more discoverable than
Who said the link should be buried?  It could be on the front page in the
"Upcoming Release" box.

I'm trying to help us become a more helpful community, especially for new
people and those who can't spend a lot of volunteer time on LLVM but still
want to help.  What I don't want to see is people getting scolded for not
doing enough.  That doesn't help any of us.

Let's end the thread as it's not doing anyone any good at this point.

                                 -Dave