Tales from the Gryphon/ archives/ 2009/

Tales from the Gryphon

Archives for 2009/02

Manoj's hackergotchi
Add a new post titled:
Wednesday 25 February
2009
Link: A day in the life of a Debian hacker

Posted terribly early Wednesday morning, February 25th, 2009

A day in the life of a Debian hacker

#+TITLE: A day in the life of a Debian hacker #+AUTHOR: Manoj Srivastava #+EMAIL: srivasta@debian.org #+DATE: #+LANGUAGE: en #+OPTIONS: H:0 num:nil toc:nil \n:nil @:t ::t |:t ^:t -:t f:t *:t TeX:t LaTeX:t skip:nil d:nil tags:not-in-toc #+INFOJS_OPT: view:showall toc:nil ltoc:nil mouse:underline buttons:nil path:http://orgmode.org/org-info.js #+LINK_UP: http://www.golden-gryphon.com/blog/manoj/ #+LINK_HOME: http://www.golden-gryphon.com/ I have been meaning to write this up for a long time now, since I #+BEGIN_HTML Packaging activity diagram #+END_HTML vaguely made a promise to do so last Debconf. I have also been wondering about the inefficiencies in my work-flow, but I kept postponing my analysis since there were still large gaps in my packaging automation since I moved off Arch as my SCM of choice. However, recently I have taken a sabbatical from Debian, so I've had time to complete bits and pieces of my package building framework, enough so that I could no longer justify putting off the analysis. I tried writing it up, but the result confused even me; so I instead recorded every shell command during a recent series of packaging tasks, and converted that into a nice, detailed, activity diagram that you see over here. This is as efficient a work-flow as I have been able to come up with. #+BEGIN_HTML details here #+END_HTML Along with a git commit hook script, that parses the commit log and adds pending tags to bugs closed in the commit, the figure above represents my complete work-flow -- down to the details of every /cd/ command I executed. I think there are too many steps still. Feedback and commentary would be appreciated, as well as any suggestions to improve efficiency.

Manoj

Tuesday 24 February
2009
Link: Rethinking ucf

Posted Tuesday night, February 24th, 2009

Rethinking ucf

#+TITLE: Rethinking UCF #+AUTHOR: Manoj Srivastava #+EMAIL: srivasta\@debian.org #+DATE: <2009-02-24 Tue> #+LANGUAGE: en #+OPTIONS: H:0 num:nil toc:nil \n:nil @:t ::t |:t ^:t -:t f:t *:t TeX:t LaTeX:t skip:nil d:nil tags:not-in-toc #+INFOJS_OPT: view:showall toc:nil ltoc:nil mouse:underline buttons:nil path:http://orgmode.org/org-info.js #+LINK_UP: http://www.golden-gryphon.com/blog/manoj/ #+LINK_HOME: http://www.golden-gryphon.com/ There has been some discussion on the Debian development mailing list #+BEGIN_HTML Tortured activity diagram #+END_HTML about adding hooks into ucf, to allow people to do things like committing files into different SCM branches. So, I thought I would help people out by letting them tell me where hooks would be useful, and so decided to do an activity diagram for ucf. Gawd, what a mess. I mean, I wrote this thing, and it boggles even my mind. See the figure for how horrendous code can get when it grows organically. So, I decided to re-factor/redesign ucf, see if I could create a less complex activity diagram. On analysis, it turns out that ucf has just five actions it may perform, and which action it takes depends on which of eight possible states the configuration file is in. #+BEGIN_HTML Gory details follow #+END_HTML

Manoj


Webmaster <webmaster@golden-gryphon.com>
Last commit: terribly early Sunday morning, June 8th, 2014
Last edited terribly early Sunday morning, June 8th, 2014