On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 16:33:13 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 15:25:59 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Please don't stop submitting patches. I'll turn them into PRs.
>
> Even though everything submitted to Bugzilla is supposed to be public domain, it would be nice to keep authorship information in the commit messages.

Git distinguishes between author and committer. It can be specified when committing:

    git commit --author="N.N. <someone@example.com>"

On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 17:45:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Patches in bugzilla might end up being turned into a PR by someone who feels that they want to spend their time submitting other peope's patches as PR's on github, but not many developers are going to do that. So, if you post patches to bugzilla, the odds are high that they will just rot.

If those patches actually fix bugs (rather than changing syntax) then there is a process problem. For just about any online community that is growing the following process is needed:

1. Lower barriers to entry, encourage participation.

2. Provide social rewards for contributions.

3. Retain users by perceived social investments.

One of strongest social validation effects you can get is mentoring. Someone "taking you under their wing" and investing in you. Someone taking a half-baked patch and turning it into a bugfix and giving the contributor positive feedback can address 2. and 3. above. Very valuable.

On 30 August 2014 16:27, Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 30/08/14 16:38, Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>
>> It's a shame that your dislike of github is stronger than your desire to contribute code.
>
>
> I'm sorry, that won't wash.  It's a given, especially now, that for some people, using these large-scale online social networks is a no-no.  Many of us may view the practical benefits as outweighing those factors, but it's not acceptable to be dismissive or arrogant in the face of those concerns.
>

Agreed.  I had some reluctance to join github to begin with, but eventually conceded as being on github may help exposure and encourage people to contribute.  In all honesty though, I can't say that there has really been any increase in external contribution vs bitbucket/sourceforge, so whatever benefits dmd or ldc got did not seem to carry over to gdc.

The only change I have noticed as being part of github is a steady stream of monthly emails and phone calls (voice messages, I never answer them), be it universities conducting a study, or recruiters looking to interview me because they came across my profile. Sometimes its annoying, but reluctantly accepted as one of the perks of being on a social site.

Iain.

On Sunday, 31 August 2014 at 15:33:45 UTC, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> The only change I have noticed as being part of github is a steady
> stream of monthly emails and phone calls (voice messages, I never
> answer them), be it universities conducting a study, or recruiters
> looking to interview me because they came across my profile.
> Sometimes its annoying, but reluctantly accepted as one of the perks
> of being on a social site.
>
> Iain.

I've never gotten calls (I didn't give my number). I have been asked to participate in 1 or 2 studies though.

I've also been contacted by a recruiter, but it got me an awesome sweet new job, so that's a perk, arguably.

I was also later contacted by another recruiter for the same company. So that was kind of ego boosting.

On 8/30/2014 7:37 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" " wrote in message
> news:pmrjlrkkaaiguefnqypr@forum.dlang.org...
>
>> Here is a good reason: «I have no interest in learning github, and I
>> personally don't care if you accept this patch, but here you have it in case
>> you want to improve your system».
>>
>> Here is another good reason: «Figuring out the D process is waaaay down on my
>> todo list, maybe sometime next month, next year, next…»
>
> If it takes longer to work out how to submit a pull request than make your
> patch, your patch probably wasn't worth doing.


While we of course would prefer that all contributors use github, there is another side.

I, of course, use lots of different software products. I often encounter bugs (obviously). So what to do about those bugs? When I try to report them, I discover far more often than not:

1. the vendor's web site has no mechanism for reporting bugs

2. if there is a mechanism, the vendor throws all sorts of annoying roadblocks in first, such as:

a. forcing me to click through their faq
b. having a 'keyhole' text entry box for the bug report (I defeat these by composing the bug report elsewhere and then cut&paste it into the keyhole)
c. putting a limit like of 300 characters for the bug report
d. making me create an account in order to submit the report
e. rejecting my bug report because I didn't fill in the form exactly right

3. the vendor will tell me I'm a unique snowflake and nobody else has the problems I reported so it won't be fixed, and btw, I should buy their upgrade for $75.

It isn't just paid software, try submitting a bug report to Thunderbird Mail.

[One of the most miserable bug reporting systems is the Patent Office's form for submitting prior art. It's hell just trying to figure out how to fill out the form correctly, and of course if you do anything wrong it just throws it on the floor.]

-----

The end result of all this is I very rarely submit bug reports anymore. If the maker makes it hard for me to submit one, I infer they don't want to hear about bug reports, so why bother?

(I also cannot recall any vendor actually fixing a bug I reported, EVER, in 30 years.)

-----

Bottom line is, if someone wants to submit a patch via bugzilla, or even email, we should be accommodating, or at least not blow him off. I've often added Bugzilla issues for things I've received via email.

On 8/30/2014 8:56 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> 'Thanks for your contribution and for helping make D
> better'.

This is what our attitude must be.

On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 14:49:04 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> "Dicebot"  wrote in message news:hvwtyelwvrsrgvbcqsse@forum.dlang.org...
>
>> No it is not. GitHub is an intrusive closed ecosystem and it is legitimate concern for anyone caring about the open internet. The fact that I have considered D contribution more important than this concern and the fact that you consider such reasoning silly does not make it less legit and/or widespread.
>
> Making a throwaway github account does not endorse github any more than contributing to D another way does.

Erm, no? It is _exactly_ what is needed for endorsement here. Just registering an account is a good enough support for majority of the user base. Because that way you help those more actively using the service to maintain expectations that there is no world outside of it and anyone meaning business must join. This is like "Social Ecosystems 101" basics, I am really worried by someone as extremely competent as you thinking it doesn't matter.

"Walter Bright"  wrote in message news:ltvuu1$imf$1@digitalmars.com...

> d. making me create an account in order to submit the report

Hmm, this is actually an argument in favour of migrating our issue tracking to github, as people are more likely to have an account there.

> The end result of all this is I very rarely submit bug reports anymore. If the maker makes it hard for me to submit one, I infer they don't want to hear about bug reports, so why bother?
>
> (I also cannot recall any vendor actually fixing a bug I reported, EVER, in 30 years.)

This is my experience too, unless you count Digital Mars =)

> Bottom line is, if someone wants to submit a patch via bugzilla, or even email, we should be accommodating, or at least not blow him off. I've often added Bugzilla issues for things I've received via email.

Generally, patches in bugzilla just rot.  Letting potential contributors think their work won't be wasted if they submit it to bugzilla would most likely lead to disappointment.

Copy-pasting a bug report into bugzilla is luckily a much less involved process than testing, presenting, updating and arguing for a pull request. 

On 1 September 2014 17:11, Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> "Walter Bright"  wrote in message news:ltvuu1$imf$1@digitalmars.com...
>
>
>> d. making me create an account in order to submit the report
>
>
> Hmm, this is actually an argument in favour of migrating our issue tracking to github, as people are more likely to have an account there.
>
>
>> The end result of all this is I very rarely submit bug reports anymore. If the maker makes it hard for me to submit one, I infer they don't want to hear about bug reports, so why bother?
>>
>> (I also cannot recall any vendor actually fixing a bug I reported, EVER,
>> in 30 years.)
>
>
> This is my experience too, unless you count Digital Mars =)
>
>
>> Bottom line is, if someone wants to submit a patch via bugzilla, or even email, we should be accommodating, or at least not blow him off. I've often added Bugzilla issues for things I've received via email.
>
>
> Generally, patches in bugzilla just rot.  Letting potential contributors think their work won't be wasted if they submit it to bugzilla would most likely lead to disappointment.
>
> Copy-pasting a bug report into bugzilla is luckily a much less involved process than testing, presenting, updating and arguing for a pull request.


People have sent patches / raised bugs directly to me in the past. Now *that* is rot.  I always forward them onto bugzilla because at least then it's in a place where:

1) More than one person can read it, and potentially act upon it.
2) Much better todo list than searching through thousands upon
thousands of emails. :)

"Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d"  wrote in message news:mailman.268.1409589011.5783.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...

> People have sent patches / raised bugs directly to me in the past.
> Now *that* is rot.  I always forward them onto bugzilla because at
> least then it's in a place where:
>
> 1) More than one person can read it, and potentially act upon it.
> 2) Much better todo list than searching through thousands upon
> thousands of emails. :)

It's better than nothing, but much worse than a pull request, in terms of chance it doesn't rot.

If the only alternative is for the patch to not be attached to the issue at all, then submitting a patch is obviously much better.