Re: [Gimp-developer] Adopt a development model similar to Jenkins?

[Jehan Pagès <jehan marmottard gmail com>]

Hi,

On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Sam Gleske <sam mxracer gmail com> wrote:
> Reference - https://github.com/jenkinsci
>
> So recently I've been introduced to the way Jenkins CI does development and
> progression of the platform.  I decided to write a plugin for Jenkins and
> so I hopped over to their IRC channel to discuss with them about it.  First
> thing they did was make me a member of the org.
>
> Basically they have two organizational teams: Owners (consists of core
> devs) and Everyone.
>
> By making me a member of the Everyone group I got commit access to all
> 1000+ repositories associated with Jenkins plugins.  I can freely
> contribute to any one of them.  However, I don't have commit access to the
> core Jenkins repository which is the main application of the whole
> platform.  I think this model is really cool.  Because basically when you
> first commit a pull request the jenkinsadmin bot will tell you how the pull
> requests work.
>
> Here is a pull request as an example [1].  The Jenkins admin posted a
> comment stating that the pull requester should read the link on pull
> requests [2].  I think this is cool.  It's basically a policy that if any
> plugin goes unnoticed pipe up and become a contributor with commit access
> to the organizations.
>
> Right now, GIMP has a place for users to dwonload plugins... but there is
> no place where the source code of all of the plugins live and be maintained.

We have the core plugins (the ones released together with GIMP)
versionned already and their source lives in the main source tree,
with GIMP itself.
Now maybe you are speaking about the user-contributed plugins, that
anyone can upload on registry.gimp.org. The current status on this is
that apart from providing a subdomain for conveniency, we have
basically no control and no verification whatsoever over whatever
users upload.

Note that providing a whole infrastructure to check plugins, source
versioning to third-party plugin devs, and such things would be great.
I actually wish to kickstart such a project some day, hopefully (see
for instance the project I was proposing if we had been accepted as
mentoring org in this year gsoc:
http://wiki.gimp.org/index.php/User:Jehan/Hacking:GSoC/2014/Ideas#Create_a_plugin_management_framework
).

But the real current status is that these third-party plugins are just
completely outside of our control. And we certainly don't have the
man-force right now to do otherwise anyway. So the wish of us keeping
their source code somewhere is irrelevant here.

> I went looking for the GIMP repository on github (it's nice that there is
> one!) however it seems sadly buried in the GNOME project repositories.

Yes this is only a mirror of our main repository hosted on the GNOME servers.

> I propose GIMP developer team take the initiative to create an
> organizational account at github and form teams similar to Jenkins.  1.
> Owners whom are the only ones with commit access to the GIMP core but can
> still accept pull requests from outsiders.  And 2. an Everyone group in
> which anybody who asks gets commit access to all of the plugins in the
> organization area.

I personally completely downvote this proposition. I have already
given my opinion about github a few times, and I'll give it again:
this is just a service provided by a company like there had been
dozens by the past and like there will be dozens more in the future.
They just come and go (look at sourceforge, it used to be the big
deal, now everyone flees the sinking stinky boat). Relying on this
kind of service is not sustainable, unless we just can't afford
hosting ourselves (like individuals, I may understand them using
services for conveniency). But we can afford it (through GNOME), so
why care?

Also basically that's not good for independence. These commercial
services always have complicated and terrible contracts that nobody
ever reads and that they just change whenever they feel like
tightening the grip a little more. We can't forget they are companies
whose goal is hence money. So I really prefer never having to rely on
them. Using them as mirror (a big strength of git) for profiting of
network effect? Fine. Using it as backup? Fine. But that's it.

Finally I used to use github when employed in a startup for a few
years. Well I really couldn't see the big idea. It is nice but it has
nothing else that we don't do otherwise as simply. Except that it does
it all in a browser, which makes it very annoying in my opinion.
Worse, projects there would likely limit themselves to whatever github
proposes. Being on our own allows us to go much further and make our
own adapted tools.

> I think this would spice up and breath development life into the GIMP
> project.  GIMP is much more than just gnome and I think the barrier to
> entry to developing on GIMP should be so low you can trip over it.  Jenkins
> does that well and I feel like by immediately being made a committer to all
> of the plugins repositories it makes me want to jump up and start
> contributing everywhere in Jenkins.

I don't understand why anyone would say this. I've had access to the
repository pretty quickly after my first patches. Of course that does
not allow me to commit big patches without maintainer agreement (and I
do hope that having write access on Jenkins repo does not mean either
that they let you commit anything you wish). But that happened quite
fast after I contributed a few patches through Bugzilla.

> There's a few reasons for that...
> 1) I feel like I'm visiably part of the development process and have been
> acknowledged.

Provide a few patches to us, and if they are good and regular, I can
certify you that you will be acknowledged very soon and be given
commit rights there too. That's how it happened for me without even
asking.
Have you contributed any patch yet? If you have any, do not hesitate!
We welcome good patches. :-)

Though once again, if you are only interested in contributing to
third-party plugins, we don't control them. They are different
projects based on GIMP (see GIMP as a platform). Get directly in touch
with these developers, not us.

> 2) I have a shiny cool Jenkins organization badge on my github user [3].

Well for this, no, you won't have. Do you really need "shiny" badges
to feel better about your contributions? I don't want to judge, but
isn't it a little silly? If you really need this, isn't some random
social network better for this than Free Software?

> 3) I think it's great that my friends and coworkers can blatantly see that
> I have at some point or will continue to contribute to the Jenkins project
> because the organizational badge is displayed on my profile.

Again, what's the point? I really think that priorities might be
slightly messed up there.

Yet as said before, you will be acknowledged. You will have commits
with your name as committer in our repository, your name will be
listed in release notes on gimp.org. You can link your friends there
if you really want them to see a proof you contributed to GIMP.

> GitHub makes coding and contributions fun.  I would love to have a GIMP
> organizational badge in my profile.  I'm learning C++ in hopes to
> contributing to GIMP [4] with more than just recommendations or the mailing
> list.

GIMP is coded in C, not in C++. :-)

> Developers and contributors, tell me your thoughts.  I hope you get as
> fired up about this as I feel.

All done above. :-)
Sorry for not being "fired up", but I strongly say *no*, and I feel
other devs will as well.

Jehan

> SAM
>
> [1]: https://github.com/jenkinsci/findbugs-plugin/pull/5
> [2]:
> https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Pull+Request+to+Repositories
> [3]: https://github.com/sag47
> [4]: https://github.com/sag47/cplusplus
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:    gimp-developer-list gnome org
> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list