curious: why use own hosting rather than github?

[Holger Dell]

Since I am a new contributor and I was explicitly mentioned in this
thread, I would like to remark that I completely agree with Rémi on this
issue. I found it painful and inefficient to go through the procedure
just to submit a simple patch (sign up for mailman, look at old patches
to infer what might be expected, study the git send-email documentation
and configure it). I am certainly capable to do it again, but I am not
particularly looking forward to it.

If there was a proper issue tracker, I would have seen that the bug was
already reported. (BTW, if the maintainers consider Rémi's fix too
invasive, note that my fix does not forbid the use of the empty name,
but just makes sure that pass continues operating normally, by testing
whether or not "" was explicitly given as the argument)

Best,
Holger

On 5/24/20 5:48 PM, Rémi Lapeyre wrote:
> 
>> Le 22 mai 2020 à 03:48, Nathan Lilienthal <nathan at nixpulvis.com> a écrit :
>>
>> I think one of the main issues here is that people hate email. I'm not
>> sure how to solve this, but it is desperately in need of a solution.
>>
> 
> 
> 
> It’s not that people hate email, but a mailing list without search is a bad way to keep track of the patches. If some people are still unconvinced that it’s the current situation is not ideal, just have a look at the last path that Holger Dell sent: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2020-May/004134.html.
> 
> 
> This solves a very painful issue, when an empty password as been saved using `pass insert ‘’` which can happen when pass is called from another process, it will completely break `pass`, `pass show` and any plugin that uses those commands. This is a major bug!
> 
> Now, Holger Dell spent time debugging, implementing a fix and sending it to the mailing list. That’s nice. What is less good is that this bug was already reported:
> 
> 
> - Andrea Gazzaniga had this issue: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2019-November/003807.html
> - Vladimir Zhelezoff had this issue: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2019-November/003809.html
> - I had this issue
> - I sent a patch to fix this issue: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2019-July/003698.html
> - Doan Tran Cong Danh sent a patch to fix this issue: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2019-November/003815.html
> 
> That’s a lot of people for such a bug and all this could be avoided with a list of currently known issues and waiting path (as far as know it’s not even possible to make a search in the mailing list archive).
> 
> Of course, I can make a fork and maintain a fixed version of patch. But then, should I convince the distribution packager to use my fork instead?
> 
> What about patches that I cannot test? Aren’t we diluting the community’s effort.
> 
> Worse, there is many things that this mailing list does very well, when a user needs help an answer is usually quick to come and while we aren’t doing a poor job to keep track of issues and patches, some members are very helpful to review them: my patch was reviewed and improved by both HacKan and Tobias Girstmair.
> 
> 
> Still, that’s a lot of people involved for an important issue whose fix is actually quite simple (and those are only the occurence I know of…).
> 
> If we agree that there is room for improvement we can start looking for solutions. For helping others and reviewing patches the mailing list work great and have many advantages as other have already pointed out. We don’t need to change everything just to fix the problem we have here.
> 
> 
> If you agree, we could try to have a quarterly thread with all thee outstanding patch and review / vote on them. Then Jason Donenfeld could pull all of them or cherry-pick some and reject others.
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t know batch enough to review the patches but even I could track the patches and open this thread once in a while if the rest of the community and Jason Donenfeld agree that this could help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P.S.: I went further back in the archive to look for other occurence of this pattern:
> 
> 
> - here’s a 2017 bug report with a https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2017-September/003051.html
> - another bug report for the same bug was made in 2018: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2018-July/003352.htm
> -  I posted another patch for this in 2020: https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2020-March/003990.html and Allan Odgaard reviewed and improved it!
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pEpkey.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3098 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/attachments/20200524/2c549688/attachment.key>