CI system maintainability

[Volker Krause]

On Friday, 29 March 2019 08:59:59 CET Kevin Ottens wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 March 2019 21:53:06 CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > Having mandatory reviews for a central and complex component like akonadi
> > looks like a very good and obvious idea.
> 
> Yep.

Looking at the 18.12 -> 19.04 timeframe the majority of changes to Akonadi 
went through pre-commit review, even more so if you discard commits doing 
release work (version bumps etc) or similar maintenance not touching the 
actual logic.

And specifically the changes that caused us the most headaches due to 
introducing a nasty regression went through review.

Sure, nothing is perfect, but I don't think code review in Akonadi is the most 
pressing issue here.
 
> > OTOH if there is only one developer who is really expert for akonadi, this
> > makes it kind of unfeasible.
> 
> That's the chicken and egg problem we're in concerning KDEPIM. The developer
> story is frankly really harder than most software out there which makes it
> unlikely for people to pick it over something else for contributions.
> That's in part tied to your next point below and partly tied to
> documentation, on- boarding etc. The unwillingness to be slowed down is
> getting in the way of fixing that situation: to be a desirable project to
> contribute to you need to spend time advocating, documenting and taking
> newbies by the hand until they become regular contributors.
> 
> Yes it's tough, and TBH I'm guilty of not doing this more on my own
> projects. But on such a strategic piece of software like KDEPIM there's
> some responsibility in carrying those duties for the well being of the
> project.

How to address the issue of bus factor ~1 components in PIM is the real 
question here, I completely agree. But this is getting way off topic from 
Ben's original issue, and for the wide range of recipients. 

Also, I don't think overly generic statements on that help us much, so maybe 
let's discuss concrete steps for this at the sprint next week?

Regards,
Volker
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20190329/4e3104df/attachment.sig>