[vtk-developers] Best way to contribute to VTK ? - Fwd: [GitHub] nolden sent you a pull request from nolden/VTK

Tue Jul 6 13:55:16 EDT 2010

If there's pre-existing bleed-through, then there's not really a good reason
to object to this particular patch.

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell <
marcus.hanwell at kitware.com> wrote:

> Possibly not, but that prototype already has freetype definitions in its
> public methods. I think as a bug fix this is reasonable, but perhaps this
> class should be overhauled. This is another area where code review really
> helps as a part of the process. In the short term I would rather improve the
> unicode support, unless you strongly object to the patch.
>
> Marcus
>
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:43 PM, David Cole <david.cole at kitware.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe it's just me.... but I don't think we should be using freetype type
>> definitions as argument types in public VTK methods.
>>
>> Does that concern anyone else that we let implementation details bleed
>> into the API? Or is it just me?
>>
>>
>> Thx,
>> David C.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell <
>> marcus.hanwell at kitware.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Marco Nolden <
>>> m.nolden at dkfz-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/06/2010 06:11 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer publishing on a public repository, but am not informed
>>>>> about pull requests on Github/Gitorious. I would certainly preserve
>>>>> authorship information, and recently integrated a patch from David Feng
>>>>> with preserved authorship. We also worked with David Gobbi on the
>>>>> wrapping branch.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think pull requests in GitHub are just an easy way to send a link to
>>>> people with write access, without much functionality. Gitorious' merge
>>>> requests are public, they have a status and the possibility to comment, e.g.
>>>> http://qt.gitorious.org/qt/qt/merge_requests
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes - I have been using merge request on gitorious, and would favor this
>>> as a public list we could view, and comment on.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Sorry if I missed this one, the change looks reasonable and I can take
>>>>> a
>>>>> look at it. It would be good to see improved unicode support too. It is
>>>>> something that the ARB should probably be discussing, but it would be
>>>>> great to involve the community as far as is possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>
>>>>>  Actually I revised it a bit, so the link is here:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://github.com/nolden/VTK/commit/9b76af72e6016fcd4a7b2e1a58edb77eb5549eef
>>>>
>>>> and the patch is attached.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There were some trailing whitespaces added, I have removed those and
>>> rebased the commit on master HEAD. I will rebuild and test this out, but at
>>> first glance it looks good. I just added your remote in the end, and fetched
>>> from that. I will see about adding some regression tests for unicode text
>>> rendering.
>>>
>>> One of the benefits of Git is the ease with which patches can flow, I
>>> definitely want us to take maximum advantage of that. We are still looking
>>> at what the best ways to achieve this are.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Moreland, Kenneth <kmorel at sandia.gov
>>>>> <mailto:kmorel at sandia.gov>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>    Is submitting patches to the mailing list now the officially
>>>>>    sanctioned method of providing contributions (as opposed to
>>>>>    publishing on a public repository such as Marco has done)?  Will
>>>>>    this change in the near future when we plan to move to a branchy
>>>>>    workflow (which as I understand it now has plans for a more open
>>>>>    “staging” repository)?
>>>>>
>>>>>    Perhaps this would be a good topic for the next ARB.
>>>>>
>>>>>    -Ken
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    On 7/6/10 7:38 AM, "Dave Partyka" <dave.partyka at kitware.com
>>>>>    <http://dave.partyka@kitware.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>        The most visible way is to send a patch to the vtk list. If you
>>>>>        use the git patch commands you can create patches that will
>>>>>        preserve the author (Marco in this case) as git has separate
>>>>>        Author and Committer fields. See this wiki at the bottom on how
>>>>>        to create a patch.
>>>>>
>>>>>        http://vtk.org/Wiki/VTK/Git#Submitting_a_patch
>>>>>
>>>>>        On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin
>>>>>        <jchris.fillionr at kitware.com
>>>>>        <http://jchris.fillionr@kitware.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>            Hi Folks,
>>>>>
>>>>>            Since VTK souce code is available using Git, the repository
>>>>>            can be forked very easily and people can contribute quite
>>>>>            easily.
>>>>>
>>>>>            Being also available on github, Marco from DKFZ (German
>>>>>            research cancer institute) forked it and added a patch. As
>>>>>            he mentioned, "Pull request" doesn't seem to "work". What
>>>>>            could be the best way for him to share his patch.
>>>>>
>>>>>            Beside of the following page
>>>>>            http://www.vtk.org/VTK/project/getinvolved.html ,
>>>>>            Is there any documentation available regarding the
>>>>>            "contribution" workflow ?
>>>>>            Is the mailing list the preferred way to share contribution
>>>>> ?
>>>>>            Will the ownership of the original "patcher" be maintained ?
>>>>>
>>>>>            I added Marco in CC, feel free to answer that email and let
>>>>>            him know the best way to share his work.
>>>>>
>>>>>            Thks
>>>>>            Jc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>            ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>            From: *GitHub* <noreply at github.com <http://noreply@
>>>>> github.com>>
>>>>>            Date: Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:17 AM
>>>>>            Subject: [GitHub] nolden sent you a pull request from
>>>>> nolden/VTK
>>>>>            To: jchris.fillionr at kitware.com
>>>>>            <http://jchris.fillionr@kitware.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>            nolden wants you to pull from nolden/VTK at 9ba9588
>>>>>
>>>>>            Body: Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>            this is a bugfix for the rendering of utf8 characters. The
>>>>>            handling of signed / unsigned was incorrect. As a result
>>>>>            only 7bit characters were rendered, though in general the
>>>>>            code was ok for 8bit characters.
>>>>>
>>>>>            cc Steven and JC, since I don't know if the "KItware" user
>>>>>            reads pull requests.
>>>>>
>>>>>            View repository:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://github.com/nolden/VTK/tree/9ba958806256e38ae4ae4fc424c37f8a7eea2ae9
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>        ****      Kenneth Moreland
>>>>>         ***      Sandia National Laboratories
>>>>>    ***********
>>>>>    *** *** ***  email: kmorel at sandia.gov <http://kmorel@sandia.gov>
>>>>>
>>>>>    **  ***  **  phone: (505) 844-8919
>>>>>         ***      web: http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>>>    Powered by www.kitware.com <http://www.kitware.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>>>>>    http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>>>>>
>>>>>    Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>>>>>    http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Powered by www.kitware.com
>>>
>>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>>> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>>>
>>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>>> http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtk-developers/attachments/20100706/71092e9b/attachment.html>