Wow. (was: Add pep8 config, use pep8 in travis (#8538))
324 views
Skip to first unread message
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 2, 2015, 2:37:40 AM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Hello everybody,
my last comment to the pull request went to /dev/null because of this:
> skirpichev locked and limited conversation to collaborators 12 hours
> ago
Wow. Locked out without fair warning. No community consensus either.
I know you get to see new sides of people as they get under stress, but
I didn't expect to see this.
I think some kind of repercussion for such entirely inacceptable
behaviour would be in order, but I'll leave judgement to others. I'm
open to discussion in private mail or here on the list.
Fair warning: If this kind of behaviour is considered acceptable by the
project, I'm out of here. Everybody's chance to rid the SymPy project of
that stubborn, nagging Toolforger me ;-)
The discussion is on https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538 .
For the record, I'm reproducing the rejected comment here on the list.
Regards,
Jo
Am 01.01.2015 um 20:00 schrieb Sergey B Kirpichev:
> On Thu, Jan 01, 2015 at 09:33:20AM -0800, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
>> You can't claim that you're impartial after all.
>
> Why not?
Conflict of interest. Duh.
>> >> 1) It makes style checking optional.
>> >
>> > No, it doesn't. See the pr code.
>>
>> It depends on whether TEST_PEP is set.
>> For the local testing case, that's "optional".
>
> TEST_PEP - for travis builds.
Still optional for local builds.
(More precisely: "local command-line uses of bin/test")
>> I haven't checked whether and where the Travis setup sets that variable.
>
> Then please read the code first.
Irrelevant to the points I'm making.
>> >> 2) It makes style checking partly optional (check_code_style is run
>> >> unconditionally, pep8.py conditionally).
>> >
>> > Travis runs both pep8 and remaining stuff in the
>> > test_code_quality.py. And you can do same locally.
>>
>> Again, that "can" means "it is optional".
>
> No. It is what it is.
Indeed, it is optional. Because you *can* activate it, or not.
Which is bad.
>> Also, it means that local tests do different thing than Travis tests.
>
> No.
So... local builds use Travis? No?
Local builds have TEST_PEP set? No?
>>>> 3) It picks the latest version of pep8.py.
>>>
>>> That's a known issue. We can disable some checks, or just wait a
>>> little and use next stable release. I don't like first option,
>> That's fixed already, so that point is moot.
>
> No. That's not fixed yet.
I saw an explicit git hash being used, so I assumed that was for fixing
this problem.
If it doesn't - well, then this still needs fixing.
I see you changed it back to HEAD yesterday.
Is that intended to be temporary, or final?
>> > E112 and E113 checks looks to be useful for me.
>>
>> We disagree on that then.
>> (See above for the reasons why I consider them useless.)
>
> I don't see anything meaningful from you in this sense, sorry.
You never asked about what you didn't find understandable, so I can't
clarify.
> We don't use here same pep8 version as your PyDev
> environment.
I am currently not talking about my PyDev environment at all.
I'm talking form a command-line user' perspective.
(Getting PyDev to handle SymPy well is going to be a major undertaking.)
> Please understand this.
I understood this several days ago.
>> I assume that you're correct for the Travis builds, but that doesn't
>> help for local testing.
>
> For local testing we should edit instructions for developers in the
> wiki. That's all.
Making tests less automatic in this way is definitely going to be -1
from me.
I've been trying to argue that point, but that didn't convince you;
therefore, I recommend you ask somebody else directly.
>> > Regarding multi-line function calls, [...]
>>
>> I mentioned these changes because I was curious whether pep8.py reports
>> them or not.
>
> Sure, it reports.
Finally. Thanks.
So... the answer to @asmeurer's question is "no, it does not ignore line
continuations". Which means he'll maintain his -1 until that test is
either disabled or (if pep8.py offers that) modified so that it does not
report these lines in their original form.
my last comment to the pull request went to /dev/null because of this:
> skirpichev locked and limited conversation to collaborators 12 hours
> ago
Wow. Locked out without fair warning. No community consensus either.
I know you get to see new sides of people as they get under stress, but
I didn't expect to see this.
I think some kind of repercussion for such entirely inacceptable
behaviour would be in order, but I'll leave judgement to others. I'm
open to discussion in private mail or here on the list.
Fair warning: If this kind of behaviour is considered acceptable by the
project, I'm out of here. Everybody's chance to rid the SymPy project of
that stubborn, nagging Toolforger me ;-)
The discussion is on https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538 .
For the record, I'm reproducing the rejected comment here on the list.
Regards,
Jo
Am 01.01.2015 um 20:00 schrieb Sergey B Kirpichev:
> On Thu, Jan 01, 2015 at 09:33:20AM -0800, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
>> You can't claim that you're impartial after all.
>
> Why not?
Conflict of interest. Duh.
>> >> 1) It makes style checking optional.
>> >
>> > No, it doesn't. See the pr code.
>>
>> It depends on whether TEST_PEP is set.
>> For the local testing case, that's "optional".
>
> TEST_PEP - for travis builds.
Still optional for local builds.
(More precisely: "local command-line uses of bin/test")
>> I haven't checked whether and where the Travis setup sets that variable.
>
> Then please read the code first.
Irrelevant to the points I'm making.
>> >> 2) It makes style checking partly optional (check_code_style is run
>> >> unconditionally, pep8.py conditionally).
>> >
>> > Travis runs both pep8 and remaining stuff in the
>> > test_code_quality.py. And you can do same locally.
>>
>> Again, that "can" means "it is optional".
>
> No. It is what it is.
Indeed, it is optional. Because you *can* activate it, or not.
Which is bad.
>> Also, it means that local tests do different thing than Travis tests.
>
> No.
So... local builds use Travis? No?
Local builds have TEST_PEP set? No?
>>>> 3) It picks the latest version of pep8.py.
>>>
>>> That's a known issue. We can disable some checks, or just wait a
>>> little and use next stable release. I don't like first option,
>> That's fixed already, so that point is moot.
>
> No. That's not fixed yet.
I saw an explicit git hash being used, so I assumed that was for fixing
this problem.
If it doesn't - well, then this still needs fixing.
I see you changed it back to HEAD yesterday.
Is that intended to be temporary, or final?
>> > E112 and E113 checks looks to be useful for me.
>>
>> We disagree on that then.
>> (See above for the reasons why I consider them useless.)
>
> I don't see anything meaningful from you in this sense, sorry.
You never asked about what you didn't find understandable, so I can't
clarify.
> We don't use here same pep8 version as your PyDev
> environment.
I am currently not talking about my PyDev environment at all.
I'm talking form a command-line user' perspective.
(Getting PyDev to handle SymPy well is going to be a major undertaking.)
> Please understand this.
I understood this several days ago.
>> I assume that you're correct for the Travis builds, but that doesn't
>> help for local testing.
>
> For local testing we should edit instructions for developers in the
> wiki. That's all.
Making tests less automatic in this way is definitely going to be -1
from me.
I've been trying to argue that point, but that didn't convince you;
therefore, I recommend you ask somebody else directly.
>> > Regarding multi-line function calls, [...]
>>
>> I mentioned these changes because I was curious whether pep8.py reports
>> them or not.
>
> Sure, it reports.
Finally. Thanks.
So... the answer to @asmeurer's question is "no, it does not ignore line
continuations". Which means he'll maintain his -1 until that test is
either disabled or (if pep8.py offers that) modified so that it does not
report these lines in their original form.
Sergey Kirpichev
Jan 2, 2015, 7:02:17 AM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
On Friday, January 2, 2015 10:37:40 AM UTC+3, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
Wow. Locked out without fair warning. No community consensus either.
Yes. I would like to see constructive discussion in that thread. When
(and if) consensus will be reached among collaborators, we can unlock the
thread again. After all, this PR is not so important.
Am 01.01.2015 um 20:00 schrieb Sergey B Kirpichev:
> On Thu, Jan 01, 2015 at 09:33:20AM -0800, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
>> You can't claim that you're impartial after all.
>
> Why not?
Conflict of interest. Duh.
I don't have other interests here, except for making SymPy better. And we have
a clear policy on how to do this:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/Development-workflow#requirements-for-inclusion
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 2, 2015, 8:50:10 AM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Sergey,
I took this here to solicit the opinion of neutral third parties, not to
argue with you - after all, that didn't work well, for neither of us.
So let's leave it at answering the questions of others.
Regards,
Jo
I took this here to solicit the opinion of neutral third parties, not to
argue with you - after all, that didn't work well, for neither of us.
So let's leave it at answering the questions of others.
Regards,
Jo
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 2, 2015, 8:51:16 AM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
If somebody is interested in tracing individual arguments: I just noted
that some of the discussion happened on
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8702
Sorry for the noise.
Regards,
Jo
that some of the discussion happened on
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8702
Sorry for the noise.
Regards,
Jo
Matthew Rocklin
Jan 2, 2015, 3:57:21 PM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Looking at the conversation you two look frustrated but still pretty civil; I'm actually impressed at how civil both of you are given that it's a PEP8 conversation. I have experienced far less civil and constructive conversations on PRs in SymPy without them being locked to people officially listed as "collaborators".
Personally I'm wary of locking issues. Historically SymPy has done really well at making people feel welcome. This has been really helpful for the project. Locking a conversation risks pushing someone away for good. Joachim has been around a while and I've found that he generally has useful things to say. It'd be a shame if he was pushed away.
Still, prolonged conversation can get in the way of actual progress. My preferred method of conflict resolution is to appeal to Aaron to make a final decision. I think that all of us trust Aaron to listen to all sides and then make decisions that are best for the project.
Just my two cents,
Best,
-Matt
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/ffec5b8b-ee6e-4cfc-a6b5-23c4f2834c61%40googlegroups.com.
Ondřej Čertík
Jan 2, 2015, 4:19:52 PM1/2/15
to sympy
Hi,
I have unlocked the PR (https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538).
Sergey, if there is ever need for such a thing (I actually didn't even
know you can lock a PR), please discuss this with me first. Blocking
anyone is a *serious* issue and that's not how I want the sympy
community to be. The people who have actual push access to the
repository at github are meant to be people to help with merging
patches (PRs) in, not as some kind of community moderators.
Joachim and Sergey, let's try to agree to disagree, especially about
so minor things like PEP8. People will always disagree about such
things, and it really is minor in the scheme of things.
Joachim, let's be frank here, I noticed that you comment a lot in some
threads and that's fine. But sometimes it can be not very productive,
i.e. no code is written based on some discussions. In such cases, it's
better to just let things go. I don't always agree with you, but you
and anyone else is always welcome to comment on any issue or email
thread. Just try to keep in mind that if the discussion is not
productive, it's wasting everybody's time to keep discussing it.
As Evelyn Beatrice Hall said in Voltaire's biography: "I do not agree
with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to
say it.".
Ondrej
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAJ8oX-EPdQv6adGTgAz%3DLS2CvcNk8f7qktAJe2uLoghub_DUcQ%40mail.gmail.com.
I have unlocked the PR (https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538).
Sergey, if there is ever need for such a thing (I actually didn't even
know you can lock a PR), please discuss this with me first. Blocking
anyone is a *serious* issue and that's not how I want the sympy
community to be. The people who have actual push access to the
repository at github are meant to be people to help with merging
patches (PRs) in, not as some kind of community moderators.
Joachim and Sergey, let's try to agree to disagree, especially about
so minor things like PEP8. People will always disagree about such
things, and it really is minor in the scheme of things.
Joachim, let's be frank here, I noticed that you comment a lot in some
threads and that's fine. But sometimes it can be not very productive,
i.e. no code is written based on some discussions. In such cases, it's
better to just let things go. I don't always agree with you, but you
and anyone else is always welcome to comment on any issue or email
thread. Just try to keep in mind that if the discussion is not
productive, it's wasting everybody's time to keep discussing it.
As Evelyn Beatrice Hall said in Voltaire's biography: "I do not agree
with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to
say it.".
Ondrej
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 2, 2015, 5:21:38 PM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Am 02.01.2015 um 22:19 schrieb Ondřej Čertík:
> Joachim, let's be frank here, I noticed that you comment a lot in some
> threads and that's fine. But sometimes it can be not very productive,
> i.e. no code is written based on some discussions.
Guilty as charged :-)
> Joachim, let's be frank here, I noticed that you comment a lot in some
> threads and that's fine. But sometimes it can be not very productive,
> i.e. no code is written based on some discussions.
Though, maybe not quite as guilty as usual in this particular case. I'm
currently trying to cut down on the errors and warnings my Eclipse
install is throwing at me, and a significant fraction of these is
PEP8-related, that's why I even care about the topic.
So, while I'm not doing much productive on Sergey's work, I am affected
by what he does in the PEP8 area.
A rather PR has already come of this, see
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8702 . (It's just a small step back
on a slippery but only marginally relevant slope, so it's really very
humble work and may or may not actually get merged.)
> In such cases, it's
> better to just let things go. I don't always agree with you, but you
> and anyone else is always welcome to comment on any issue or email
> thread. Just try to keep in mind that if the discussion is not
> productive, it's wasting everybody's time to keep discussing it.
As such things go, I'm not assuming I've always been successful, but ah
well.
Regards,
Jo
Sergey B Kirpichev
Jan 2, 2015, 5:30:35 PM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 10:19:48PM +0100, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> I have unlocked the PR (https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538).
>
> Sergey, if there is ever need for such a thing (I actually didn't even
> know you can lock a PR), please discuss this with me first.
Ok, I consider two possibilities. Either lock PR, or
> I have unlocked the PR (https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538).
>
> Sergey, if there is ever need for such a thing (I actually didn't even
> know you can lock a PR), please discuss this with me first.
close it. I don't think, that other reviewers should go through
unproductive discussion thread.
Review should be helpful. For example, I suppose, that people
read code (and run, if that's appropriate) before commenting on it.
It seems for me, this is not the case...
> not as some kind of community moderators
Ondřej Čertík
Jan 2, 2015, 5:54:53 PM1/2/15
to sympy
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:30 PM, Sergey B Kirpichev
<skirp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 10:19:48PM +0100, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
>> I have unlocked the PR (https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538).
>>
>> Sergey, if there is ever need for such a thing (I actually didn't even
>> know you can lock a PR), please discuss this with me first.
>
> Ok, I consider two possibilities. Either lock PR, or
> close it. I don't think, that other reviewers should go through
> unproductive discussion thread.
>
> Review should be helpful. For example, I suppose, that people
> read code (and run, if that's appropriate) before commenting on it.
> It seems for me, this is not the case...
Yes. And Joachim admitted that he might have discussed unproductively
<skirp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 10:19:48PM +0100, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
>> I have unlocked the PR (https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/8538).
>>
>> Sergey, if there is ever need for such a thing (I actually didn't even
>> know you can lock a PR), please discuss this with me first.
>
> Ok, I consider two possibilities. Either lock PR, or
> close it. I don't think, that other reviewers should go through
> unproductive discussion thread.
>
> Review should be helpful. For example, I suppose, that people
> read code (and run, if that's appropriate) before commenting on it.
> It seems for me, this is not the case...
(in another thread few minutes ago), so I think next time just ask to
finish the discussion, since it seems unproductive, and/or bring it to
Aaron's attention, as he is ultimately responsible for any code
decisions. As Matthew suggested above.
>
>> not as some kind of community moderators
>
> Please take into account, that this is my PR.
between the two hats that you have:
1) the author of a PR
2) having push access
and you should not use the power of 2) for 1), i.e. for your own PRs,
the best is to behave like if you didn't even have a push access.
Ondrej
Aaron Meurer
Jan 2, 2015, 6:36:25 PM1/2/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
As Matthew noted, please appeal to me if you can't reach a consensus. The point of the BDFL model is to have someone come in and make a final decision, before the community tears itself apart.
I admit that I don't have time to read every pull request any more, and as Joachim noted, I also try to avoid bikesheds. So if you think such a situation is necessary, please ping me either via private email or Google Hangouts, in case I don't see your ping on GitHub. The point is to avoid people hating each other over petty things, so it's better to not wait forever (but also I don't want people to hate me, so I'll only do it when absolutely necessary).
Regarding locking issues on pull requests, the feature was added by GitHub to protect against a very rare situation where an issue goes viral (usually on Hacker News) and dozens of people who have never participated in the community before come in to offer their opinions. It's a situation that, as far as I know, SymPy hasn't had, and we should hope we never do. It mostly affects very large projects (like jquery) or controversial projects (like that tip4commit issue I referenced in another thread). I think personally GitHub should have made this feature much less hidden, but there you go.
For members of the community, even people who participate less and don't have push access like Jachim, we should not block them.
Aaron Meurer
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CADDwiVDEmi60KfXiS%3DavODc%2B2NGQwa8wC0o_FUA8Tb1N2xuvPg%40mail.gmail.com.
Francesco Bonazzi
Jan 3, 2015, 11:21:31 AM1/3/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
On Friday, January 2, 2015 11:21:38 PM UTC+1, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
I'm currently trying to cut down on the errors and warnings my Eclipse
install is throwing at me, and a significant fraction of these is
PEP8-related, that's why I even care about the topic.
When I was using the PyDev plugin for Eclipse, I noticed that it lacked much customizability, i.e. there are limited suboptions if you switch the PEP8 warning on. Did you consider to report this problem to the PyDev discussions, rather than trying to adapt SymPy to conform to PyDev's warnings/errors?
Furthermore, PyDev marks some expressions such as S.One, S.Half, S.<something> as errors. But that's not SymPy's problem, that's a bug in PyDev.
I think that PyDev is a great attempt to support the Python programming language inside Eclipse, but PyDev still needs some work and has too many open issues. Besides, their website claims they only have one developer:
http://pydev.org/about.html
Anyways, I repeat my suggestion: use PyCharm instead of Eclipse+PyDev; this way you may avoid getting plenty of warnings/errors inside your IDE.
Aaron Meurer
Jan 3, 2015, 2:20:18 PM1/3/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Or, uh, *cough* *cough*, Emacs.
Aaron Meurer
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/3e68b123-c621-4474-a185-0dc8f76b1b56%40googlegroups.com.
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 3, 2015, 2:34:56 PM1/3/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Am 03.01.2015 um 17:21 schrieb Francesco Bonazzi:
>
>
> On Friday, January 2, 2015 11:21:38 PM UTC+1, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
>>
>> I'm currently trying to cut down on the errors and warnings my Eclipse
>> install is throwing at me, and a significant fraction of these is
>> PEP8-related, that's why I even care about the topic.
>>
>>
> When I was using the PyDev plugin for Eclipse, I noticed that it lacked
> much customizability, i.e. there are limited suboptions if you switch the
> PEP8 warning on.
I think you can switch off all the warnings and still have a useful
>
>
> On Friday, January 2, 2015 11:21:38 PM UTC+1, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
>>
>> I'm currently trying to cut down on the errors and warnings my Eclipse
>> install is throwing at me, and a significant fraction of these is
>> PEP8-related, that's why I even care about the topic.
>>
>>
> When I was using the PyDev plugin for Eclipse, I noticed that it lacked
> much customizability, i.e. there are limited suboptions if you switch the
> PEP8 warning on.
debugger.
I didn't get around to try that out yet.
> Did you consider to report this problem to the PyDev
> discussions, rather than trying to adapt SymPy to conform to PyDev's
> warnings/errors?
> Furthermore, PyDev marks some expressions such as *S.One, S.Half,
> S.<something>* as errors. But that's not SymPy's problem, that's a bug in
> PyDev.
My impression has been that PyDev simply doesn't know that SymPy
installs these names into S at runtime.
Solution 1: Switch off these tests. (Which would be a pity because it's
a useful one.)
Solution 2: Make it so that no members need to be installed into S at
runtime. (I haven't fully investigated all options for this, due to lack
of time.)
> Anyways, I repeat my suggestion: use PyCharm instead of Eclipse+PyDev; this
> way you may avoid getting plenty of warnings/errors inside your IDE.
IDEs as I switch languages is going to be too distracting.
Sergey Kirpichev
Jan 20, 2015, 8:11:49 AM1/20/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Hello,
I feel it would be a bad idea to quit silently. Probably, I should
explain this action for others (without "fair warings" and so on). This
thread - probably the best place, due to context.
I got several private messages about the "tone in pull requests" and so on.
Actually, besides the current example, also these:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/issues/7971
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/7356
(Perhaps, there are more, but I'm not informed of.)
While I'm ok when someone point on my flaws, errors and so on (sometimes people
just have bad days, it happens) and I'll try to correct my behaviour accordingly,
I think this should be done with several principles:
1) assume good faith
2) be fair, i.e. analyze the whole conversation, not
part of it or just single commentary (all above cases)
3) be helpful. For example, if you want to improve
something - just do it. You see bad answer - post good one; you
see unconstructive conversation - help people to reach a consensus.
4) please remember that all you assertions about
"the tone", kindness and so on - are more or less subjective.
I feel that these principles are violated here too often. Ondrej also said me, that
we are loosing people due to the harsh atmosphere I created. If it's a real issue (i.e.
there are such people), I would like to apologize to them personally and I'll happy
to announce that I'm not a treat for the sympy community anymore.
Perhaps, it's my bad and my communication skills are too low for the sympy.
On another hand, if this is a potential loss - please remember, you are loosing
people for a number of different reasons. For example, if the review is very
polite, but will end with committing of the wrong and non-professional code -
this is also bad. People will be disappointed. Also, should we "welcome
to comment on any issue or email thread" without adding some requirements
(see below what I assume from reviewers, for example)? Longer
conversation - harder for other reviewers. Being friendly, welcoming
and polite - not a real requirement here (in first - it's too subjective),
rather a sane suggestion. But if you prefer such "requirements" instead...
Well, perhaps, you guys should wipe out quote "talk is cheap, show me the code"
from the instructions for newcomers. From the history of the thread in
subject and persons involved, it seems now clear that the sympy community prefer talks. I don't
think this is a good direction for the project as a whole. For example, I
would like to assume, that every PR reviewer will at least read the workflow
instruction, PR content, relevant documentation and will actually run the code.
It seems, this is not accepted as a sane assumption by the sympy community.
Then, I think that my involvement in the project was waste of my time and I
should stop one.
Just "being welcoming and polite" actually looks as a very secondary
goal. Primary one should be - create and save an alive, professional and productive
community around the project. But for you it's not, for example you lost a real and very
productive contributor (well, at least one I'm aware off) just due to the license
change (only potential gain; I'm not sure you got any profit to the present
time) - is this ok? (I don't think so and "authors_skip" variable in the
bin/mailmap_update.py - seems for me as a shame for the project.)
Sorry for long message, but I think there is something to
think about. Esp. that most members of the sympy group are
inactive now (I hope, this not my bad only) and that the sympy is
just as "close to enter serious CAS market" as it was
in 2008 (when you lost Kirill).
I feel it would be a bad idea to quit silently. Probably, I should
explain this action for others (without "fair warings" and so on). This
thread - probably the best place, due to context.
I got several private messages about the "tone in pull requests" and so on.
Actually, besides the current example, also these:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/issues/7971
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/7356
(Perhaps, there are more, but I'm not informed of.)
While I'm ok when someone point on my flaws, errors and so on (sometimes people
just have bad days, it happens) and I'll try to correct my behaviour accordingly,
I think this should be done with several principles:
1) assume good faith
2) be fair, i.e. analyze the whole conversation, not
part of it or just single commentary (all above cases)
3) be helpful. For example, if you want to improve
something - just do it. You see bad answer - post good one; you
see unconstructive conversation - help people to reach a consensus.
4) please remember that all you assertions about
"the tone", kindness and so on - are more or less subjective.
I feel that these principles are violated here too often. Ondrej also said me, that
we are loosing people due to the harsh atmosphere I created. If it's a real issue (i.e.
there are such people), I would like to apologize to them personally and I'll happy
to announce that I'm not a treat for the sympy community anymore.
Perhaps, it's my bad and my communication skills are too low for the sympy.
On another hand, if this is a potential loss - please remember, you are loosing
people for a number of different reasons. For example, if the review is very
polite, but will end with committing of the wrong and non-professional code -
this is also bad. People will be disappointed. Also, should we "welcome
to comment on any issue or email thread" without adding some requirements
(see below what I assume from reviewers, for example)? Longer
conversation - harder for other reviewers. Being friendly, welcoming
and polite - not a real requirement here (in first - it's too subjective),
rather a sane suggestion. But if you prefer such "requirements" instead...
Well, perhaps, you guys should wipe out quote "talk is cheap, show me the code"
from the instructions for newcomers. From the history of the thread in
subject and persons involved, it seems now clear that the sympy community prefer talks. I don't
think this is a good direction for the project as a whole. For example, I
would like to assume, that every PR reviewer will at least read the workflow
instruction, PR content, relevant documentation and will actually run the code.
It seems, this is not accepted as a sane assumption by the sympy community.
Then, I think that my involvement in the project was waste of my time and I
should stop one.
Just "being welcoming and polite" actually looks as a very secondary
goal. Primary one should be - create and save an alive, professional and productive
community around the project. But for you it's not, for example you lost a real and very
productive contributor (well, at least one I'm aware off) just due to the license
change (only potential gain; I'm not sure you got any profit to the present
time) - is this ok? (I don't think so and "authors_skip" variable in the
bin/mailmap_update.py - seems for me as a shame for the project.)
Sorry for long message, but I think there is something to
think about. Esp. that most members of the sympy group are
inactive now (I hope, this not my bad only) and that the sympy is
just as "close to enter serious CAS market" as it was
in 2008 (when you lost Kirill).
On Friday, January 2, 2015 at 10:37:40 AM UTC+3, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
> Fair warning: If this kind of behaviour is considered acceptable by the
> project, I'm out of here. Everybody's chance to rid the SymPy project of
> that stubborn, nagging Toolforger me ;-)
Thanks to Joachim, who showed me the door. Really thanks, no
bad feelings from my side at all.
Thanks to all, thanks to all who helped me with patches, esp. to Chris and Aaron.
bad feelings from my side at all.
Thanks to all, thanks to all who helped me with patches, esp. to Chris and Aaron.
Harsh Gupta
Jan 21, 2015, 3:08:56 AM1/21/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
It was great working with you Sergey. You and Matthew were the best combination of mentors I could have got. So, Thank you.
AMiT Kumar
Jan 21, 2015, 10:00:03 AM1/21/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Though, I am comparatively new to SymPy, but I have pinged Sergey a lot for PR reviews, his comments always had some sort of learning involved. Today I feel pretty disappointed as Sergey has left Sympy. He has been a great source of learning for me atleast.
His contribution to SymPy is invaluable.
Thank you Sergey!
Ondřej Čertík
Jan 21, 2015, 1:58:46 PM1/21/15
to sympy
Hi,
First of all, thanks Sergey for all the work you have done, from
coding, pull request reviews, GSoC mentoring and other things. I am
sad that you decided to leave, but you have the right to decide that
way of course.
I wanted to say a few words publicly about this, since a few of you
might be confused about the whole situation, and I think it is in
order to clear some things up.
Really the only unwritten rule that we have in the sympy community is
to be friendly, welcoming and polite. That's how we built this
community and that's not negotiable. Also, I am honestly really
surprised and sad that anyone would like to negotiate such elementary
principles of human interaction.
We talked to you Sergey I think in March, giving you examples of some
(in our opinion) bad interaction and offering help to improve it in
the future. We did the same in September I believe.
Aaron and I continued getting private messages from several people
about unwelcoming and (sometimes even rude) atmosphere that was
created on some issues and PRs. As you know Sergey, I recently offered
you privately to help respond better in the future, in fact, I
specifically asked you not to leave, but rather try to improve some of
the communication. But you rejected my offer and rather decided to
leave anyway. Again, you have the right to do so. But at that point, I
don't know what else I can do to help.
The problem is that most people don't complain. They either put up
with it, or they leave. If the person is a new contributor, they are
more likely to leave. Many people feel like they have no right to
complain, because they are new to SymPy, or because they haven't
contributed enough. Some people don't complain because they don't want
things to get worse.
However, if you decide in the future that you would like to come back,
you are always welcome. The only rule that we have is to be friendly,
welcoming and polite. It is really simple and my offer to you stands
--- if you want my help in improving your communication style, I'll be
happy to do help, as long as the effort to improve comes from you.
You mentioned Kirill, I have offered him (several years after he left)
to put his name back where it belongs into the author list, but he
didn't accept the offer. My offer to him stands as well.
As to "talk is cheap, show me the code", I removed it long time ago
from the wiki. I still love it, after all these years, I think it
captures the essence of it --- and I love short sentences like this
that bluntly capture the reality. But you have to understand the
quote, and if you are new to programming and a completely new
contributor to sympy, this can be easily misunderstood, in fact it's
rude -- it is rude to say this to a new contributor. But after you get
to know people well and you know they know you well, over a beer
privately you can say stuff like this. Let me give another example,
that doesn't apply to sympy (fortunately!), but nevertheless it
captures the same dilemma --- swear words: you can use swear words
over a beer with close friends, but you can't do that on a public
mailinglist or issues or PRs. It's very similar to "talk is cheap,
show me the code", because a right single swear word said at the right
time, with the right tone captures the reality better than a thousand
words --- so it's a great tool, but it can't be used in public,
because if somebody reads an issue, PR or a mailinglist with such a
language, 99% of time it will get interpreted badly, it will push
people away from the project. And you can't say it to a close friend
on a public forum either, for the same reason, even if your friend
doesn't get offended, somebody else will. Swearing is an extreme
example, but I think it greatly exemplifies the issues involved, that
what you can say in private to a close friend you can't say in public,
and it doesn't mean that you are a hypocrite. The phrase "talk is
cheap, show me the code" is something in between, it's not swearing,
but it's not very polite either.
Ondrej
First of all, thanks Sergey for all the work you have done, from
coding, pull request reviews, GSoC mentoring and other things. I am
sad that you decided to leave, but you have the right to decide that
way of course.
I wanted to say a few words publicly about this, since a few of you
might be confused about the whole situation, and I think it is in
order to clear some things up.
Really the only unwritten rule that we have in the sympy community is
to be friendly, welcoming and polite. That's how we built this
community and that's not negotiable. Also, I am honestly really
surprised and sad that anyone would like to negotiate such elementary
principles of human interaction.
We talked to you Sergey I think in March, giving you examples of some
(in our opinion) bad interaction and offering help to improve it in
the future. We did the same in September I believe.
Aaron and I continued getting private messages from several people
about unwelcoming and (sometimes even rude) atmosphere that was
created on some issues and PRs. As you know Sergey, I recently offered
you privately to help respond better in the future, in fact, I
specifically asked you not to leave, but rather try to improve some of
the communication. But you rejected my offer and rather decided to
leave anyway. Again, you have the right to do so. But at that point, I
don't know what else I can do to help.
The problem is that most people don't complain. They either put up
with it, or they leave. If the person is a new contributor, they are
more likely to leave. Many people feel like they have no right to
complain, because they are new to SymPy, or because they haven't
contributed enough. Some people don't complain because they don't want
things to get worse.
However, if you decide in the future that you would like to come back,
you are always welcome. The only rule that we have is to be friendly,
welcoming and polite. It is really simple and my offer to you stands
--- if you want my help in improving your communication style, I'll be
happy to do help, as long as the effort to improve comes from you.
You mentioned Kirill, I have offered him (several years after he left)
to put his name back where it belongs into the author list, but he
didn't accept the offer. My offer to him stands as well.
As to "talk is cheap, show me the code", I removed it long time ago
from the wiki. I still love it, after all these years, I think it
captures the essence of it --- and I love short sentences like this
that bluntly capture the reality. But you have to understand the
quote, and if you are new to programming and a completely new
contributor to sympy, this can be easily misunderstood, in fact it's
rude -- it is rude to say this to a new contributor. But after you get
to know people well and you know they know you well, over a beer
privately you can say stuff like this. Let me give another example,
that doesn't apply to sympy (fortunately!), but nevertheless it
captures the same dilemma --- swear words: you can use swear words
over a beer with close friends, but you can't do that on a public
mailinglist or issues or PRs. It's very similar to "talk is cheap,
show me the code", because a right single swear word said at the right
time, with the right tone captures the reality better than a thousand
words --- so it's a great tool, but it can't be used in public,
because if somebody reads an issue, PR or a mailinglist with such a
language, 99% of time it will get interpreted badly, it will push
people away from the project. And you can't say it to a close friend
on a public forum either, for the same reason, even if your friend
doesn't get offended, somebody else will. Swearing is an extreme
example, but I think it greatly exemplifies the issues involved, that
what you can say in private to a close friend you can't say in public,
and it doesn't mean that you are a hypocrite. The phrase "talk is
cheap, show me the code" is something in between, it's not swearing,
but it's not very polite either.
Ondrej
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sympy" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/42947884-38ea-4012-aa75-dce287207ed9%40googlegroups.com.
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sympy" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
Chris Smith
Jan 21, 2015, 5:05:32 PM1/21/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Thanks to Sergey for all the PRs you've helped me wade through, including the dead-end signs that you posted along the way! I was hoping you would be around longer than me (who has been trying to leave for about 2 years now)!
Thanks to all (lilke Ondrej) who have been willing to offer help and support to all members of the community to help it run more smoothly. Talking about rough spots is never comfortable but it is the sort of thing that enables growth and health.
Sergey B Kirpichev
Jan 22, 2015, 8:52:27 AM1/22/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:58:42AM -0700, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> Really the only unwritten rule that we have in the sympy community is
> to be friendly, welcoming and polite.
And you personally decide what that means...
> Really the only unwritten rule that we have in the sympy community is
> to be friendly, welcoming and polite.
> Also, I am honestly really
> surprised and sad that anyone would like to negotiate such elementary
> principles of human interaction.
that this is just a tool. Target is - constructive and productive conversation.
Sometimes your tool works alone well, but usually - not, sorry.
> We talked to you Sergey I think in March, giving you examples of some
> (in our opinion) bad interaction and offering help to improve it in
> the future. We did the same in September I believe.
can do own judgments how bad it is.
> As you know Sergey, I recently offered
> you privately to help respond better in the future, in fact, I
> specifically asked you not to leave, but rather try to improve some of
> the communication.
can do and I wonder why for 3) you need my permission...
> The problem is that most people don't complain.
author of this thread during the conversation in the PR.
Imagine, there are better things in the world than fill complaints...
> They either put up with it, or they leave. If the person is a new
> contributor, they are more likely to leave.
> However, if you decide in the future that you would like to come back,
> you are always welcome.
message. And I'm very sceptical about possible changes in the
project policy.
> You mentioned Kirill, I have offered him (several years after he left)
> to put his name back where it belongs into the author list, but he
> didn't accept the offer. My offer to him stands as well.
important than people...
> As to "talk is cheap, show me the code", I removed it long time ago
> from the wiki.
> I still love it, after all these years, I think it
> captures the essence of it --- and I love short sentences like this
> that bluntly capture the reality.
additional "talks" about this.
Ondrej, thank you for your reply. My message wasn't an invitation for a
discussion here, I'm only trying to explain why I did what I did. Let's stop.
Harsh, Amit, Colin, Chris, thank you for your words.
Shivam Vats
Jan 22, 2015, 10:45:21 AM1/22/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Though I'm too late, I'd still like to thank Sergey for mentoring my first open source PR ever. You are an awesome reviewer. Yes, you were sometimes difficult to please, but then that also made me try harder to fix things myself.
Thank you.
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 22, 2015, 10:48:24 AM1/22/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Am 22.01.2015 um 14:52 schrieb Sergey B Kirpichev:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:58:42AM -0700, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
>> Really the only unwritten rule that we have in the sympy community is
>> to be friendly, welcoming and polite.
>
> And you personally decide what that means...
Ah, so you have an idea who else should decide?
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:58:42AM -0700, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
>> Really the only unwritten rule that we have in the sympy community is
>> to be friendly, welcoming and polite.
>
> And you personally decide what that means...
>> Also, I am honestly really
>> surprised and sad that anyone would like to negotiate such elementary
>> principles of human interaction.
>
> Again, I'm not against friendly and welcoming communication. But I see
> that this is just a tool. Target is - constructive and productive conversation.
>> The problem is that most people don't complain.
>
> For example, I'm. Despite some questionable sentences from the
> author of this thread during the conversation in the PR.
finally censoring me was unquestionable?
That seems highly biased to me.
> Imagine, there are better things in the world than fill complaints...
Sadly, blatant power abuse allows little choice.
>> However, if you decide in the future that you would like to come back,
>> you are always welcome.
>
> I don't think it's possible. I explained why in my previous
> message. And I'm very sceptical about possible changes in the
> project policy.
that needs to be changed. (Oh well right, some things could be improved,
as it is always.)
>> As to "talk is cheap, show me the code", I removed it long time ago
>> from the wiki.
>
> Mar 2014. I can guess why you did this.
misunderstood.
I'm with him with that. It's too easily misunderstood by those who read
it, and it's also too easily misused as ammunition by those who use it.
>> I still love it, after all these years, I think it
>> captures the essence of it --- and I love short sentences like this
>> that bluntly capture the reality.
>
> You know what it means, I know, everyone here knows.
He was about what effects it causes.
And that in the end, the unwanted effects outweighed the wanted ones and
they decided to take the sentence out.
> No need for additional "talks" about this.
quote meant you or the current situation?
I do not think it is, I read that as giving an example how the meaning
of a message can diverge from how it affects people.
The point being that much of your talk might suffer from a simlar
effect: You mean well but come over as so rude that people feel offended.
(My personal opinion is slightly divergent, I'm just trying to interpret
his words as faithfully as I can.)
> Ondrej, thank you for your reply. My message wasn't an invitation for a
> discussion here, I'm only trying to explain why I did what I did. Let's stop.
And you argue at length how you're being treated unfairly.
Arguing is fair enough.
Asking to stop after putting out a lot of controversal claims isn't fair
enough, it's an attempt at having the final word, and nothing that
should be granted to anybody.
Jason Moore
Jan 23, 2015, 1:29:30 AM1/23/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Looks like Github had to clarify communication guidelines for their company in an explicit way. Worth a read.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Shivam Vats <shiv...@gmail.com> wrote:
Though I'm too late, I'd still like to thank Sergey for mentoring my first open source PR ever. You are an awesome reviewer. Yes, you were sometimes difficult to please, but then that also made me try harder to fix things myself.Thank you.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/d8481f5a-40aa-4827-bde9-c0b0e8ed701f%40googlegroups.com.
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 23, 2015, 5:34:13 AM1/23/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
Am 23.01.2015 um 07:29 schrieb Jason Moore:
> This is timely:
>
> https://github.com/blog/1943-how-to-write-the-perfect-pull-request
That's an excellent list. Concise and to the point, but all the
> This is timely:
>
> https://github.com/blog/1943-how-to-write-the-perfect-pull-request
important things covered (including some I wasn't aware of except
subconsciously, good to have that explict).
> Looks like Github had to clarify communication guidelines for their company
> in an explicit way. Worth a read.
Opinions?
Ondřej Čertík
Jan 23, 2015, 10:21:08 AM1/23/15
to sympy
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Jason Moore <moore...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is timely:
>
> https://github.com/blog/1943-how-to-write-the-perfect-pull-request
>
> Looks like Github had to clarify communication guidelines for their company
> in an explicit way. Worth a read.
Thanks for sharing, very timely indeed.
> This is timely:
>
> https://github.com/blog/1943-how-to-write-the-perfect-pull-request
>
> Looks like Github had to clarify communication guidelines for their company
> in an explicit way. Worth a read.
Ondrej
Ondřej Čertík
Jan 23, 2015, 10:22:06 AM1/23/15
to sympy
Ondrej
Joachim Durchholz
Jan 23, 2015, 2:28:46 PM1/23/15
to sy...@googlegroups.com
enough to have it linked :-)
... done. Added two paragraphs at the end of
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/Development-workflow#reviewing-patches .
Ondřej Čertík
Jan 24, 2015, 12:55:00 PM1/24/15
to sympy
Ondrej
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sympy" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages