<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Aug 24, 2016, at 12:28 PM, Renato Golin <<a href="mailto:renato.golin@linaro.org" class="">renato.golin@linaro.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><p dir="ltr" class="">We have free text answers for both groups of answers, usage and impact. People can write whatever they want there. </p></div></blockquote><div>I gave an example in my email, but I be more blunt: the value of the question "How does the choice between a single repository with all projects and the use of sub-modules impact your usage of Git?” without a *mandatory* text-field is *zero*.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>— </div><div>Mehdi</div><div><br class=""></div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><p dir="ltr" class="">I don't see what the problem is... </p><p dir="ltr" class="">Cheers, <br class="">
Renato </p>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On 24 Aug 2016 8:01 p.m., "Mehdi Amini" <<a href="mailto:mehdi.amini@apple.com" class="">mehdi.amini@apple.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution" class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br class="">
> On Aug 19, 2016, at 4:23 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br class="">
><br class="">
><br class="">
> Folks,<br class="">
><br class="">
> I've created the survey with the feedback I got on the "Voting" thread<br class="">
> in the llvm-foundation list, and put it here:<br class="">
><br class="">
> <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__goo.gl_forms_k4J7M3N7oLNTOlDq2&d=CwIGaQ&c=Hw-EJUFt2_D9PK5csBJ29kRV40HqSDXWTLPyZ6W8u84&r=XndYjVJuvcoEtO9BUlAZk8839TPlVRJeJXMNUFEz-qQ&m=OhW1rKp29KzWPJmzePqaWyyFm8koNMtnNM4xM0DOCLM&s=6u9FpXqnNR5dxnPdXhgM17YsrxuvACOEtpCweWvOffM&e=" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://urldefense.proofpoint.<wbr class="">com/v2/url?u=https-3A__goo.gl_<wbr class="">forms_k4J7M3N7oLNTOlDq2&d=<wbr class="">CwIGaQ&c=Hw-EJUFt2_<wbr class="">D9PK5csBJ29kRV40HqSDXWTLPyZ6W8<wbr class="">u84&r=<wbr class="">XndYjVJuvcoEtO9BUlAZk8839TPlVR<wbr class="">JeJXMNUFEz-qQ&m=<wbr class="">OhW1rKp29KzWPJmzePqaWyyFm8koNM<wbr class="">tnNM4xM0DOCLM&s=<wbr class="">6u9FpXqnNR5dxnPdXhgM17YsrxuvAC<wbr class="">OEtpCweWvOffM&e=</a><br class="">
><br class="">
> Apparently, I can't allow people to comment on the form itself. It's<br class="">
> either full permission or nothing. So, I think the best way to do this<br class="">
> is to do a review on the list, with my most sincere apologies to the<br class="">
> anti-spam folks.<br class="">
><br class="">
> For that reason, I have only sent to llvm-dev, and would encourage<br class="">
> people to share privately with colleagues that didn't get it, via<br class="">
> lists, IRC, etc. Let's leave social media out of this, or we risk<br class="">
> having to filter out a lot of spam / trolls and make the whole<br class="">
> exercise moot.<br class="">
><br class="">
> People that have an interest on this question already subscribe to<br class="">
> this list or the IRC channel.<br class="">
><br class="">
><br class="">
> The Plan<br class="">
><br class="">
> Today it's the 19th, so about the time I promised to put the survey up<br class="">
> for review. From today to the Sep 1st, we'll be filling the form,<br class="">
> trying out the questions, changing the wording, adding new questions,<br class="">
> etc.<br class="">
><br class="">
> If you guys could fill up with some data, see how it feels, and in the<br class="">
> end I'll try to share the bogus results, to see if that's what people<br class="">
> expected.<br class="">
><br class="">
> Around Sep 1st, The GitHub proposal should be finished (we'll have a<br class="">
> common document with both sub-modules and mono-repo explained), and<br class="">
> the survey should also be finished.<br class="">
><br class="">
> Since the survey has some free-text fields, it's less important how<br class="">
> precise is the writing, but we need to get the multiple-choice<br class="">
> questions right, to have a general idea of a "voting" mechanism.<br class="">
<br class="">
I’m not sure what value we’ll get from these data without a free text field for *every* question.<br class="">
For example, for anyone that select the answer "It'll be a major impact to our build system, as we'll have to stop most of our current production to refactor the whole build system to adapt to such a scenario” ; I’d like to have some explanations about this.<br class="">
This is an example, but it is valid for almost all the questions: otherwise I wouldn’t trust that the answers are made with a full understanding of the proposals.<br class="">
<br class="">
—<br class="">
Mehdi<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
><br class="">
> My hope is that by Sep 1st, we'll have the GitHub proposal done and<br class="">
> the survey online for real, when I'll wipe out all responses and we'll<br class="">
> start fresh again.<br class="">
><br class="">
><br class="">
> Design Choices<br class="">
><br class="">
> TL;DR, feel free to ignore this section...<br class="">
><br class="">
> Just FYI, the design choices for the survey were:<br class="">
><br class="">
> 1. Request name, email and affiliation to de-duplicate the data. There<br class="">
> is no way to prevent people from responding twice without forcing them<br class="">
> to sign up on Google, which I will most certainly not do.<br class="">
><br class="">
> The identification also helps us to group people by their affiliations<br class="">
> and to have an idea of representation. I'm not expecting everyone on<br class="">
> the same group to have the same opinion, but it will be interesting to<br class="">
> see how they change.<br class="">
><br class="">
> Name and email will not be shared, but affiliation will (should it?).<br class="">
> I'm expecting the free-text descriptions to be very telling to that<br class="">
> respect, so there's no point is hiding it.<br class="">
><br class="">
> 2. Gathering people's involvement in LLVM is important. We want to<br class="">
> know how much stake people have in LLVM, so we can weight more the<br class="">
> choices of people with more stake, but weight the same the *opinions*<br class="">
> of everyone.<br class="">
><br class="">
> What I mean by this is that, if most of the core developers feel<br class="">
> strongly towards using Git and a few external developers feel strongly<br class="">
> against, the people that will be using the most will have a higher<br class="">
> weight.<br class="">
><br class="">
> But the technical arguments of the minority is still weighted in the<br class="">
> same way as the vast majority, after all, they're *technical*<br class="">
> arguments and not *opinions*.<br class="">
><br class="">
> 3. Separating "moving to Git/Github" from "using<br class="">
> mono-repo/sub-modules" is crucial. We may not get a consensus on the<br class="">
> latter, but we should get it for the former. It'll be much simpler for<br class="">
> a second iteration if we know we're going to use Git and GitHub and I<br class="">
> want to make sure we get this right.<br class="">
><br class="">
> If we have an overwhelmingly positive response to using GitHub, but<br class="">
> we're still divided to use sub-modules or mono-repo, we can close the<br class="">
> "move to Git" question now, and just work on the details later.<br class="">
><br class="">
> cheers,<br class="">
> --renato<br class="">
> ______________________________<wbr class="">_________________<br class="">
> LLVM Developers mailing list<br class="">
> <a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br class="">
> <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/<wbr class="">mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>