accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Loss <bfl...@praxiseng.com>
Subject Re: JIRA Patch Conventions
Date Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:28:25 GMT
+1 for this approach

On Apr 24, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
 wrote:

> +1 for #2.
> 
> Also, I like the convention: ACCUMULO-XXXX.#.patch, where XXX is the
> ticket number, and # is the 1-up identifier.
> 
> The ACCUMULO-XXXX part is nice so you don't lose context when you
> download the file locally, and the .patch suffix is nice because many
> editors will do syntax highlighting. (of course, I'm talking about
> patches for the filename extension... one could just as easily provide
> a .java file or a .jpg or something else).
> 
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM, William Slacum
> <wilhelm.von.cloud@accumulo.net> wrote:
>> Leave the tickets on there. I'm not trying to romance you Mike, I want more
>> history and less mystery.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Corey Nolet <cnolet@texeltek.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> #2 as well.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:08 AM, John Vines <vines@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I too am in favor of the patch history being available.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Billie Rinaldi
>>>> <billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I like #2 as well. Here's a quote from the incubator list confirming
>>> that
>>>>> we don't need ICLAs for patches.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Under the terms of the AL, any contribution made back to the ASF
on
>>>>>> ASF infrastructure, such as via a mailing list, JIRA, or Bugzilla,
is
>>>>>> licensed to the foundation. The JIRA checkbox existed to give people
>>>>>> an easy way to _avoid_ contributing something. There is no need to
>>> ask
>>>>>> casual patchers for ICLAs.
>>>>> On Apr 24, 2013 10:05 AM, "Josh Elser" <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 4/24/13 9:32 AM, Keith Turner wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Mike Drob <mdrob@mdrob.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Accumulo Devs,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Are there any conventions that we'd like to follow for attaching
>>>>> updated
>>>>>>>> patches to issues? There are two lines of thought applicable
here:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1) Remove the old one and attach the new patch. This has
the
>>>> advantage
>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> being immediately obvious to future google searchers what
the patch
>>>>> was,
>>>>>>>> especially in case of back porting issues.
>>>>>>>> 2) Leave all patches attached to the ticket, and use a one-up
>>>>> identifier
>>>>>>>> for each subsequent patch. This preserves context from comments,
>>> and
>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>> be useful in other ways.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I've seen both approaches used on Accumulo tickets, and don't
have
>>> a
>>>>>>>> strong
>>>>>>>> preference outside of a desire for consistency. I think I'd
lean
>>>>> towards
>>>>>>>> option #2, if only because that means I get one fewer email
>>>>> notification.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I agree I would like consistency.   I lean towards 2 also,
but I
>>> do
>>>>> not
>>>>>>> have a good reason, its just my preference.  We should probably
put
>>>>>>> together a page outlining how to submit a patch.  I have seen
other
>>>>>>> projects do this.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ditto.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As an aside, what is the IP status of submitted patches? I think
I
>>>>>>>> remember
>>>>>>>> hearing that they immediately become part of the Apache Foundation,
>>>> so
>>>>>>>> removing them might be a bad idea from that perspective.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Does someone who is submitting patches need to submit an
ICLA?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I believe they just need to be capable of assigning the copyright
to
>>>> the
>>>>>> ASF (as in, an employer does not hold rights to the patch). I believe
>>>> the
>>>>>> ICLA is more for the case of a committer being able to use SVN (and
>>> not
>>>>>> having the jira checkbox).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Corey Nolet
>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>> TexelTek, inc.
>>> [Office] 301.880.7123
>>> [Cell] 410-903-2110
>>> 


Mime
View raw message