[llvm-dev] [RFC] GitHub Survey - Please review

Aaron Ballman via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri Aug 19 05:28:36 PDT 2016


Thank you for working on this!

Some minor nits:

"If you chose 2~4 above, please explain your reasons here"

The above set of radio buttons are not numbered, so the use of numbers
here is a bit strange. Perhaps "If you answered above that moving to
Git/GitHub would have some (or greater) impact on your productivity,
please explain your reasons here" or something along those lines?

For the question about single repo vs submodules, you should have a
choice for "I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about." Not
everyone knows what submodules are or why a single repo vs submodules
would be impactful.

~Aaron

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I've created the survey with the feedback I got on the "Voting" thread
> in the llvm-foundation list, and put it here:
>
> https://goo.gl/forms/k4J7M3N7oLNTOlDq2
>
> Apparently, I can't allow people to comment on the form itself. It's
> either full permission or nothing. So, I think the best way to do this
> is to do a review on the list, with my most sincere apologies to the
> anti-spam folks.
>
> For that reason, I have only sent to llvm-dev, and would encourage
> people to share privately with colleagues that didn't get it, via
> lists, IRC, etc. Let's leave social media out of this, or we risk
> having to filter out a lot of spam / trolls and make the whole
> exercise moot.
>
> People that have an interest on this question already subscribe to
> this list or the IRC channel.
>
>
>   The Plan
>
> Today it's the 19th, so about the time I promised to put the survey up
> for review. From today to the Sep 1st, we'll be filling the form,
> trying out the questions, changing the wording, adding new questions,
> etc.
>
> If you guys could fill up with some data, see how it feels, and in the
> end I'll try to share the bogus results, to see if that's what people
> expected.
>
> Around Sep 1st, The GitHub proposal should be finished (we'll have a
> common document with both sub-modules and mono-repo explained), and
> the survey should also be finished.
>
> Since the survey has some free-text fields, it's less important how
> precise is the writing, but we need to get the multiple-choice
> questions right, to have a general idea of a "voting" mechanism.
>
> My hope is that by Sep 1st, we'll have the GitHub proposal done and
> the survey online for real, when I'll wipe out all responses and we'll
> start fresh again.
>
>
>   Design Choices
>
> TL;DR, feel free to ignore this section...
>
> Just FYI, the design choices for the survey were:
>
> 1. Request name, email and affiliation to de-duplicate the data. There
> is no way to prevent people from responding twice without forcing them
> to sign up on Google, which I will most certainly not do.
>
> The identification also helps us to group people by their affiliations
> and to have an idea of representation. I'm not expecting everyone on
> the same group to have the same opinion, but it will be interesting to
> see how they change.
>
> Name and email will not be shared, but affiliation will (should it?).
> I'm expecting the free-text descriptions to be very telling to that
> respect, so there's no point is hiding it.
>
> 2. Gathering people's involvement in LLVM is important. We want to
> know how much stake people have in LLVM, so we can weight more the
> choices of people with more stake, but weight the same the *opinions*
> of everyone.
>
> What I mean by this is that, if most of the core developers feel
> strongly towards using Git and a few external developers feel strongly
> against, the people that will be using the most will have a higher
> weight.
>
> But the technical arguments of the minority is still weighted in the
> same way as the vast majority, after all, they're *technical*
> arguments and not *opinions*.
>
> 3. Separating "moving to Git/Github" from "using
> mono-repo/sub-modules" is crucial. We may not get a consensus on the
> latter, but we should get it for the former. It'll be much simpler for
> a second iteration if we know we're going to use Git and GitHub and I
> want to make sure we get this right.
>
> If we have an overwhelmingly positive response to using GitHub, but
> we're still divided to use sub-modules or mono-repo, we can close the
> "move to Git" question now, and just work on the details later.
>
> cheers,
> --renato
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list