cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: github pull requests (was: Re: 4.5 RM)
Date Fri, 22 Aug 2014 18:46:06 GMT

On Aug 22, 2014, at 6:04 AM, Leo Simons <LSimons@schubergphilis.com> wrote:

> On Aug 19, 2014, at 11:06 PM, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 19, 2014, at 4:38 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Sebastien,
>>> 
>>> On 19-Aug-2014, at 10:17 pm, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The fact that we basically have none, pushes me to argue for a change in
git workflow (see several other threads). because it will be way faster to start "gating"
commits using a new agreed upon workflow (even though it would be a very artificial gate)
than waiting for CI.
>>> 
>>> I would love to know your experience of using Github pull requests for the ACS
doc repos, and if it will be a good idea to use it for the main repo as well?
>> 
>> Using github pr for the docs repo has been a breeze. Of course it's a totally different
"code" than cloudstack.
>> 
>> The way this work is that people is that people fork on github and submit pr, we
turned on github pr notifications (you have seen some of the emails). We don't merge via github
though, we pull the patch by hand and apply it "git am" then push.
> 
> Cool.
> 
> Just want to point out that this gives the committer a _bit_ more responsibility to verify
that there is an actual Contribution (as per the apache license and/or CLA) being done. When
someone sends a patch via e-mail or to an apache.org system that’s pretty clearly implied,
but for github, you do have to pay a little bit of attention [1].
> 

as much attention as when taking a patch from RB or an attached patch in JIRA. I read the
issue and I did not see anything alarming about pr.

imho, when we say "we accept pull requests" we are really saying that we are ok using github
as we do RB.

> Also note you can do pull requests without github, see `git request-pull --help`. Of
course the UI isn’t as pretty, but I’d suggest allowing it just to deal with “zomg github
is down”, and to be ready to receive any future patches from Linus [2] :-)

yes, let's investigate that. Can you try submitting it that way ?

I skimmed [2], and to have the same issue as Linus we would need to define standards for our
commits, which we don't have. 
So right now our standard is extremely low. I am all in favor of upping our standard but remember
that Linus is a benevolent dictatorship which unfortunately we are not :)


> 
> 
> cheers,
> 
> 
> Leo
> 
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-156
> [2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/pull/17#issuecomment-5654674
> 


Mime
View raw message