asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Till Westmann" <ti...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Commit messages
Date Sun, 18 Jun 2017 00:40:11 GMT
Ok, I’ve updated the formatting guideline [1] and adapted the
components in the JIRA project [2] by renaming them and prepending the
acronym that can be used in the subject line.

Please check if this looks right.

The list of components is not exactly the one in the e-mail.
Specifically I’ve changed the acronym for "storage" from "STR" to 
"STO"
to avoid confusing "storage" with "string handling" (or something
similar).
I mention this explicitly, as there are a few open reviews that use
"STR" and it would be nice if we could update those before committing.

I hope that this works for everybody (didn't get too much feedback) as
it will help us to produce better release notes for AsterixDB's users.

Cheers,
Till

[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ASTERIXDB/Formatting
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/ASTERIXDB

On 15 Jun 2017, at 15:50, Till Westmann wrote:

> Yes, works better for me.
>
> Are there other opinions/concerns on the subject?
>
> Thanks,
> Till
>
> On 15 Jun 2017, at 15:46, Yingyi Bu wrote:
>
>> How about ING?
>>
>> Best,
>> Yingyi
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Till Westmann <tillw@apache.org> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, we could also do "TXN" -> "TX" and "RTM" -> "RT" as I think that
>>> those 2-letter acronyms are quite common.
>>> The one that confuses me (but I don’t have a good alternative) is 
>>> "IGS".
>>> Any other alternatives that come to mind?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Till
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15 Jun 2017, at 15:27, Yingyi Bu wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 for short acronyms:
>>>>
>>>> Here is a list of acronyms:
>>>> - API
>>>> - AQL
>>>> - CLUS (cluster management)
>>>> - COMP (compiler)
>>>> - CONF (configuration parameters/mgmt)
>>>> - DOC
>>>> - FAIL (failure handling)
>>>> - EXT (external)
>>>> - IDX
>>>> - IGS (ingestion)
>>>> - FUN (function)
>>>> - LIC
>>>> - MVN
>>>> - MTD (metadata)
>>>> - PERF (performance monitoring etc.)
>>>> - REPL
>>>> - RPC (cc/nc message)
>>>> - RTM (runtime)
>>>> - STAT (statistics etc.)
>>>> - SITE
>>>> - STR
>>>> - SQL
>>>> - TEST
>>>> - TXN (transaction)
>>>> - TYPE (data model)
>>>> - UDF (user defined function)
>>>> - UI
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Till Westmann <tillw@apache.org> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But the first line should also be below 50 characters [1]. That 
>>>> might
>>>>> become tricky with a single component and it becomes more 
>>>>> difficult, if
>>>>> a change touches more than one component (the ellipsis in [2] show 
>>>>> the
>>>>> reason).
>>>>>
>>>>> To include components into the commit message it might be better 
>>>>> to do
>>>>> that in the body instead of the subject (and we might want to use 
>>>>> the
>>>>> same name that we use in JIRA).
>>>>> Also, it does seem redundant to have the components that are 
>>>>> available
>>>>> in the referenced JIRA issue again in the message, but then it’s 
>>>>> not
>>>>> exactly trivial to join the log messages with the components in 
>>>>> JIRA
>>>>> (unless both are available in AsterixDB ;) )
>>>>>
>>>>> Alternatively, we could think about really short acronyms for the
>>>>> components to make them fit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>> Till
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] 
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ASTERIXDB/Formatting
>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/commits/master
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 15 Jun 2017, at 14:55, Mike Carey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/15/17 1:19 PM, Yingyi Bu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Each commit message should
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) reference 1 or more JIRA issues (that hopefully provide
a 
>>>>>>>> rationale
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    the change).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2) contain a description of changes to the user model

>>>>>>>>> (language
>>>>>>>>> syntax,
>>>>>>>>>    configuration parameters, ..)
>>>>>>>>> 3) contain a description of storage format changes (that
would
>>>>>>>>> require
>>>>>>>>>    reloading or upgrading)
>>>>>>>>> 4) contain a description of interface changes (for source
code
>>>>>>>>> consumers)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we could put component name(s) into the headline

>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> commit
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> message.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So the headline will be sth. like:
>>>>>>> [ASTERIXDB-2000][TXN] Fix a deadlock in LogManager
>>>>>>> [ASTERIXDB-2001][STORAGE] Clean up file handling in BufferCache
>>>>>>> ....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It makes change localization easier.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Examples:
>>>>>>> Spark: https://github.com/apache/spark/commits/master
>>>>>>> Flink: https://github.com/apache/flink/commits/master
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is a list of component names:
>>>>>>> - API
>>>>>>> - AQL
>>>>>>> - CLUSTER (cluster management)
>>>>>>> - COMPILER
>>>>>>> - CONFIGURATION (configuration parameters/mgmt)
>>>>>>> - DOC
>>>>>>> - FAILURE (failure handling)
>>>>>>> - EXTERNAL
>>>>>>> - INDEX
>>>>>>> - INGESTION
>>>>>>> - FUNC (function)
>>>>>>> - LICENSE
>>>>>>> - MAVEN
>>>>>>> - METADATA
>>>>>>> - PERF (performance monitoring etc.)
>>>>>>> - REPLICATION
>>>>>>> - RPC (cc/nc message)
>>>>>>> - RUNTIME
>>>>>>> - STATS (statistics etc.)
>>>>>>> - SITE
>>>>>>> - STORAGE
>>>>>>> - SQL++
>>>>>>> - TEST
>>>>>>> - TXN (transaction)
>>>>>>> - TYPE (data model)
>>>>>>> - UDF (user defined function)
>>>>>>> - UI
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> Yingyi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Yingyi Bu <buyingyi@gmail.com>

>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> Yingyi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Mike Carey 
>>>>>>>> <dtabass@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 !!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think this is a GREAT proposal, and we can also then

>>>>>>>>> hopefully do
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> equivalent of grep'ing the commits to identify things
that we 
>>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>> incorporate in a high-level set of release notes.  I
also 
>>>>>>>>> really like
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> "no" requirement. Also, storage changes should really
NOT be 
>>>>>>>>> taken
>>>>>>>>> lightly
>>>>>>>>> - they seriously inconvenience our customers and will

>>>>>>>>> hopefully cause
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> tests to fail (the ones that check for backward-compat)
- I 
>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> set storage changes actually be voted on, ideally, if
we could 
>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> part of our operating procedure somehow?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/17 9:15 AM, Till Westmann wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> some of us had a discussion with an SDSC team last
week that 
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> running
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> AsterixDB instance. Their customer perspective on
AsterixDB
>>>>>>>>>> highlighted a
>>>>>>>>>> few areas of improvement to ease the consumption
of 
>>>>>>>>>> AsterixDB.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> One thing that I’d like to follow up on are release
notes. 
>>>>>>>>>> So far we
>>>>>>>>>> didn’t
>>>>>>>>>> provide them and so changes to the system came as
a surprise 
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> everybody
>>>>>>>>>> who is not monitoring commits closely.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As I think that it’s not easy to provide good release
notes 
>>>>>>>>>> I’d like
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> propose some additions to our commit messages to
ease the 
>>>>>>>>>> creation
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> release messages:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Each commit message should
>>>>>>>>>> 1) reference 1 or more JIRA issues (that hopefully
provide a
>>>>>>>>>> rationale
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>     the change).
>>>>>>>>>> 2) contain a description of changes to the user model

>>>>>>>>>> (language
>>>>>>>>>> syntax,
>>>>>>>>>>     configuration parameters, ..)
>>>>>>>>>> 3) contain a description of storage format changes
(that 
>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>> require
>>>>>>>>>>     reloading or upgrading)
>>>>>>>>>> 4) contain a description of interface changes (for
source 
>>>>>>>>>> code
>>>>>>>>>> consumers)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and all reviewers should check that these are mentioned
in 
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> commit
>>>>>>>>>> message. To increase the probability to we won’t
forget to 
>>>>>>>>>> mention
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> changes in 2-4, I think that we should should explicitly

>>>>>>>>>> mention the
>>>>>>>>>> absence
>>>>>>>>>> of such changes, i.e.:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> user model changes: no
>>>>>>>>>> storage format changes: no
>>>>>>>>>> interface changes: no
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts/concerns about this?
>>>>>>>>>> Is this manageable?
>>>>>>>>>> Are there other kinds of changes that have a high
impact on
>>>>>>>>>> consumers
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> we should call out?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> Till´
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>

Mime
View raw message