5 ms·

My impression is that LuaJIT is too perfect/complex to the GitHub collaborative model work, where developers uses the software, identify a bug/missing feature f

by bratao 11y ago

My impression is that LuaJIT is too perfect/complex to the GitHub collaborative model work, where developers uses the software, identify a bug/missing feature for his use case, dig in code for a day/week, and do a push. In LuaJIT the stakes are much higher, and a small change can have big repercussions. Relying on occasional open-source contributors seems like a direct path to abandonware.

brandonwamboldt 11y ago
I disagree, it lowers the barrier of entry for people to document code, clean up documentation, or just review the code and report issues (e.g. security related). Even if LuaJIT doesn't see a lot of random contributors, it makes it easier to review commits and what not.
chrisseaton 11y ago
I think it would be ok if you have a CI system that runs benchmarks. If a PR comes in you let the CI run and tell you if there are any regressions.
- gsnedders 11y ago
  Good benchmarking systems are few and far between, and so many unexpected factors can cause noise, before you even write your first performance test. I'd love a Travis CI for performance tests, but it's a seriously hard problem.
thejosh 11y ago
How so? The benefits of GitHub benefit regular committers over fly-by PRs.
jetm9 11y ago
So true. Some (increasingly rare) code does not translate into modern trends. actually it's more like craftmanship and LuaJIT is a craft. Just like Gigablast open source search engine.
pierrec 11y ago
Fear not. First of all, occasional contributors are perfectly compatible with LuaJIT. Take a look at the Git log. Many of the commits are bugfixes that don't impact the overall "perfection". It's not a crystalline structure: http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git/shortlog http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git/shortlog You can even get a list of those commits that are contributed, mostly by the exact process that you describe as being inappropriate: http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git?a=search&st=commit&s=Thanks+to&.cgifields=sr http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git?a=search&st=commit&s=Than... Also, I don't think CloudFlare have the intention of entirely relying on sporadic contributions. As they said earlier this month, "we will be investing significantly in its development and are interested in hearing from people who would like to work full time on LuaJIT as employees of CloudFlare." (I'd be curious to know how that's moving along!)
hobo_mark 11y ago
Is it possible (as in, easy), to use something like gerrit/rietveld on top of (or next to) github? I am imagining a bot what will take GH pull requests, submit the patch to gerrit for review, and answer to the user something like "thank you for your contribution, this project uses an external platform for code review, a discussion was automatically created to review your changes, please follow this link to participate".
- Sanddancer 11y ago
  It looks like it's already done. There's a Gerrit plugin in-tree for doing a workflow like you described [1]. [1] https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/github/+/master/README.md https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/github/+/master/READ...
- piotrkaminski 11y ago
  Another option is to use a code review tool similar to Gerrit / Rietveld but built from the ground up for integration with GitHub. Recent entrants include https://review.ninja https://review.ninja, https://gitcolony.com https://gitcolony.com, and https://reviewable.io https://reviewable.io (disclosure: this last one's mine).

by bratao 11y ago

brandonwamboldt 11y ago

I disagree, it lowers the barrier of entry for people to document code, clean up documentation, or just review the code and report issues (e.g. security related). Even if LuaJIT doesn't see a lot of random contributors, it makes it easier to review commits and what not.

chrisseaton 11y ago

I think it would be ok if you have a CI system that runs benchmarks. If a PR comes in you let the CI run and tell you if there are any regressions.

gsnedders 11y ago
Good benchmarking systems are few and far between, and so many unexpected factors can cause noise, before you even write your first performance test. I'd love a Travis CI for performance tests, but it's a seriously hard problem.

thejosh 11y ago

How so? The benefits of GitHub benefit regular committers over fly-by PRs.

jetm9 11y ago

So true. Some (increasingly rare) code does not translate into modern trends. actually it's more like craftmanship and LuaJIT is a craft. Just like Gigablast open source search engine.

pierrec 11y ago

Fear not. First of all, occasional contributors are perfectly compatible with LuaJIT. Take a look at the Git log. Many of the commits are bugfixes that don't impact the overall "perfection". It's not a crystalline structure: http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git/shortlog http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git/shortlog You can even get a list of those commits that are contributed, mostly by the exact process that you describe as being inappropriate: http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git?a=search&st=commit&s=Thanks+to&.cgifields=sr http://repo.or.cz/w/luajit-2.0.git?a=search&st=commit&s=Than... Also, I don't think CloudFlare have the intention of entirely relying on sporadic contributions. As they said earlier this month, "we will be investing significantly in its development and are interested in hearing from people who would like to work full time on LuaJIT as employees of CloudFlare." (I'd be curious to know how that's moving along!)

hobo_mark 11y ago

Is it possible (as in, easy), to use something like gerrit/rietveld on top of (or next to) github? I am imagining a bot what will take GH pull requests, submit the patch to gerrit for review, and answer to the user something like "thank you for your contribution, this project uses an external platform for code review, a discussion was automatically created to review your changes, please follow this link to participate".

Sanddancer 11y ago
It looks like it's already done. There's a Gerrit plugin in-tree for doing a workflow like you described [1]. [1] https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/github/+/master/README.md https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/github/+/master/READ...
piotrkaminski 11y ago
Another option is to use a code review tool similar to Gerrit / Rietveld but built from the ground up for integration with GitHub. Recent entrants include https://review.ninja https://review.ninja, https://gitcolony.com https://gitcolony.com, and https://reviewable.io https://reviewable.io (disclosure: this last one's mine).