New Library SOP

New Library SOP

[Patrick Venture]

Brad;

William contributed two libraries by building them as a repo under his
personal work account first, and then presumably you mirrored from
them.  Is this the process you prefer?  I'm looking to do some
cleanup-by-library and wanted to take off in the right direction.

I plan to grab some code and fixup three of the daemons to then use it.

Patrick

Re: New Library SOP

[Brad Bishop]

> On Sep 11, 2018, at 8:41 PM, Patrick Venture <venture@google.com> wrote:
> 
> Brad;
> 
> William contributed two libraries by building them as a repo under his
> personal work account first, and then presumably you mirrored from
> them.  Is this the process you prefer?  I'm looking to do some
> cleanup-by-library and wanted to take off in the right direction.

I don’t think I have a preferred process.  The one you have described should
work fine.  Otherwise I can just create a new repo.  I suppose it is a bit
easier for people to leave feedback that way?

Re: New Library SOP

[Patrick Venture]

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM Brad Bishop
<bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 11, 2018, at 8:41 PM, Patrick Venture <venture@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Brad;
> >
> > William contributed two libraries by building them as a repo under his
> > personal work account first, and then presumably you mirrored from
> > them.  Is this the process you prefer?  I'm looking to do some
> > cleanup-by-library and wanted to take off in the right direction.
>
> I don’t think I have a preferred process.  The one you have described should
> work fine.  Otherwise I can just create a new repo.  I suppose it is a bit
> easier for people to leave feedback that way?

I agree that by forcing it through at least one round of gerrit people
have a chance to weigh in, which is preferable in my opinion.  And
goes along with the notion of upstream-first, which has something I've
been trying to push.

Re: New Library SOP

[Brad Bishop]

> On Sep 12, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Patrick Venture <venture@google.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM Brad Bishop
> <bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 11, 2018, at 8:41 PM, Patrick Venture <venture@google.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Brad;
>>> 
>>> William contributed two libraries by building them as a repo under his
>>> personal work account first, and then presumably you mirrored from
>>> them.  Is this the process you prefer?  I'm looking to do some
>>> cleanup-by-library and wanted to take off in the right direction.
>> 
>> I don’t think I have a preferred process.  The one you have described should
>> work fine.  Otherwise I can just create a new repo.  I suppose it is a bit
>> easier for people to leave feedback that way?
> 
> I agree that by forcing it through at least one round of gerrit people
> have a chance to weigh in, which is preferable in my opinion.  And
> goes along with the notion of upstream-first, which has something I've
> been trying to push.

Ok.  So what should the name of the new repository be?  And what will the content be?

Re: New Library SOP

[Patrick Venture]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 5:09 AM Brad Bishop <bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 12, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Patrick Venture <venture@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM Brad Bishop
> > <bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Sep 11, 2018, at 8:41 PM, Patrick Venture <venture@google.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Brad;
> >>>
> >>> William contributed two libraries by building them as a repo under his
> >>> personal work account first, and then presumably you mirrored from
> >>> them.  Is this the process you prefer?  I'm looking to do some
> >>> cleanup-by-library and wanted to take off in the right direction.
> >>
> >> I don’t think I have a preferred process.  The one you have described should
> >> work fine.  Otherwise I can just create a new repo.  I suppose it is a bit
> >> easier for people to leave feedback that way?
> >
> > I agree that by forcing it through at least one round of gerrit people
> > have a chance to weigh in, which is preferable in my opinion.  And
> > goes along with the notion of upstream-first, which has something I've
> > been trying to push.
>
> Ok.  So what should the name of the new repository be?  And what will the content be?

Thanks.

I talked to wak@ and I'm holding off on creating a new library to
track whether pivoting to a different already-existing one is a better
plan -- it wasn't clear that they were a good match but they probably
are. :)

That said, for future reference, as I'm sure other libraries will pop-up ->

Patrick