From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E1FC432BE for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 02:11:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C08360C51 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 02:11:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243959AbhH0CLr (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 22:11:47 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:60342 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241128AbhH0CLr (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 22:11:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 5428 invoked by uid 109); 27 Aug 2021 02:10:59 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 02:10:59 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 11077 invoked by uid 111); 27 Aug 2021 02:10:58 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 22:10:58 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 22:10:57 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Jiang Xin , Git List , Junio C Hamano , Alexander Shopov , Jordi Mas , Matthias =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=BCster?= , Jimmy Angelakos , Christopher =?utf-8?B?RMOtYXo=?= , =?utf-8?Q?Jean-No=C3=ABl?= Avila , Bagas Sanjaya , Alessandro Menti , Gwan-gyeong Mun , Arusekk , Daniel Santos , Dimitriy Ryazantcev , Peter Krefting , Emir SARI , =?utf-8?B?VHLhuqduIE5n4buNYyBRdcOibg==?= , Fangyi Zhou , Yi-Jyun Pan , Jiang Xin Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ci: new github-action for git-l10n code review Message-ID: References: <20210822161325.22038-1-worldhello.net@gmail.com> <20210822161325.22038-2-worldhello.net@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 02:14:43PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Yes, this is a solution I also want to try at the very beginning. But > > some l10n team leaders may fork their repositories directly from > > git/git, and name their repo as "{OWNER}/git". I want to try another > > solution: check existence of file "ci/config/allow-l10n" in branch > > "ci-config" using a GitHub API, instead of cloning the ci-config > > branch and execute the shell script "ci/config/allow-l10n". > > I understood that you were trying to imitate what git/git does. > > The problem, in git/git as well as in your patch, is that this is highly > cumbersome to use. Yes, it would be better if there was an easier UI to do > what you want to do, but the current reality is: there isn't. > > The main reason why it is so cumbersome to use is that your chosen > strategy scatters the CI configuration so much that it puts a mental > burden on the users. I, for one, have no idea what is currently in my > `ci-config` branch. And new users will be forced to struggle to set up > their fork in such a way that the configuration does what they want it to > do. > > And in this instance, there is not even any good reason to make it hard on > the users because most will likely not need that new workflow at all. That > workflow is primarily interesting for the l10n maintainers. Just adding my two cents as the person who created the "ci-config" mechanism: yes, it's absolutely horrible, and should be avoided if at all possible. :) Your repo-name solution seems like a quite reasonable alternative. (I'd still love for there to be a way to selectively disable CI on certain branches, but I didn't find another one, short of enforcing branch-naming conventions that the whole project must agree on). -Peff