cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebgoa <run...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Date Tue, 21 Oct 2014 07:49:11 GMT

On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:36 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, no one says it so let me be the bad guy.
> 
> <rant>
> Nothing will work unless the citrix department in california agrees. They
> have their in-house legacy proces to change and will not unless they can
> sell it easily upstream. So whether we make a grand uninfied proposal or
> take small steps doesn't matter, it must fit their internal political
> situation.
> This is very unhealthy. I am not saying that the objections coming from
> that group are unreasonable every time. Sometimes they were more then other
> times. I am even sure that they are working on improving as well but this
> is invisible to the rest of us. A mail every once in a while does not make
> this visible. The proces of improving the way we work is impaired by it.
> They to need to make small steps so we can see what is happening and where
> we are going. Even a grand proposal by Citrix California won't be accepted,
> because the change will be to big!
> </rant>
> 
> <frustrated conclusion>
> I made some small steps in improving during the 4.4.1 release process.
> These were largely ignored or reverted in the current branch. unless the
> current state of 4.5 happens to be very good we are in for a repeat of
> recent history.
> </frustrated conclusion>
> 
> You know where to find me,
> Daan

I will mostly +1 this 

-sebastien

> 
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 6:32 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> 
>> Code reviews are great.
>> 
>> However, we will need to change our behavior quite a bit if code is to make
>> it in within a reasonable amount of time as code reviews today often don't
>> get done in a timely fashion.
>> 
>> In a volunteer community, it's hard to "assign" work (including code
>> reviews) to people (let alone expect it done on your schedule).
>> 
>> This is, of course, different at most of our day jobs where managers are in
>> a position to make sure the community is responsive.
>> 
>> On Monday, October 20, 2014, Rajani Karuturi <rajani@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> I like the way Stephen split it.
>>> Here is my vote.
>>> +1 on using github pull requests.
>>> +1 on compulsory code reviews and PRs even for committers and CI build
>> pass
>>> before merging.
>>> +1 on merges from 4.5 to master and no individual commits(or
>> cherry-picks)
>>> to the branches
>>> +0 on RM for master and commits gated by him. I agree with Stephen that
>>> code reviewer should be doing the push. But, I am ok with RM doing
>>> it(assuming we have a volunteer ;) ).
>>> 
>>> +1 on any changes independently.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ~Rajani
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Stephen Turner <
>> Stephen.Turner@citrix.com
>>> <javascript:;>>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> As I just said in the other thread -- but to repeat it here in the
>>>> PROPOSAL thread --
>>>> 
>>>> I am +1 on using github pull requests.
>>>> 
>>>> I am +1 on all code changes being reviewed by a committer other than
>> the
>>>> author, as well as undergoing some automated CI testing, before the
>> pull
>>>> request is merged.
>>>> 
>>>> I am +0 on only the master RM merging the pull request. I don't want
>> the
>>>> author to push the code, but I think the code reviewer could do this;
>> in
>>>> practice the RM will not be able to review everything again so is
>> likely
>>> to
>>>> rubber-stamp the results of the code review / automated testing. But I
>>>> could live with the master RM doing it.
>>>> 
>>>> I am +1 on moving ahead with any of these parts individually, rather
>> than
>>>> waiting for everything to be in place before doing anything.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Stephen Turner
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: sebgoa [mailto:runseb@gmail.com <javascript:;>]
>>>> Sent: 18 October 2014 10:00
>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <javascript:;>
>>>> Subject: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
>>>> 
>>>> After [1] I would like to officially bring up the following proposal.
>>>> 
>>>> [Proposal]
>>>> ----
>>>> All commits come through github PR, *even* for committers. We declare a
>>>> moratorium period (agreed suspension of activity) during which direct
>>>> commit to master is forbidden.
>>>> Only the master RM is allowed to merge PR in master (we define a master
>>>> RM). If direct commit to master is done, master RM reverts without
>>> warning.
>>>> Same for 4.5 and 4.4. branches.
>>>> ----
>>>> 
>>>> This is drastic and I am sure some folks will not like it, but here is
>> my
>>>> justification for such a measure:
>>>> 
>>>> [Reasons]:
>>>> ----
>>>> Our commit and release processes have so far been based on the idea
>> that
>>>> development happens on master and that a release branch is cut from
>>> master
>>>> (unstable development branch). Then a different set of community
>> members
>>>> harden the release branch, QA and bring it to GA level. During that
>> time
>>>> development keeps on going in master.
>>>> 
>>>> This is an OK process if we have the luxury of having a QA team and can
>>>> cope with split personality of being developers and release managers.
>>>> 
>>>> My point of view is that as a community we cannot afford such a split
>>>> brain organization and our experience overt the last year proves my
>> point
>>>> (delayed release date, broken builds, features merged without
>> warning...)
>>>> 
>>>> We can avoid this by cutting a release branch from a stable one (from
>> the
>>>> start), then as you (Daan) have mentioned several times, fix bugs in
>> the
>>>> release branch and merge them back in the stable source of the release
>>> (be
>>>> it master).
>>>> 
>>>> Feature development need to be done outside master, period. Not only
>> for
>>>> non-committers but also for committers. And merge request need to be
>>>> called. This will help review and avoid surprises.
>>>> 
>>>> New git workflow were proposed and shutdown, mostly calling for better
>> CI
>>>> to solve quality issues. CI will not solve our quality issues alone. We
>>>> need to better police ourselves.
>>>> 
>>>> To avoid long discussions, I propose this simple but drastic measure.
>> We
>>>> move all our commits to github PR until 4.5 is out, this stands for
>>>> committers and non-committers, direct commits (especially to master)
>>> would
>>>> be reverted immediately.
>>>> ----
>>>> 
>>>> Our development and release process is broken, we cannot continue like
>>>> this, let's fix it.
>>>> 
>>>> [1] http://markmail.org/thread/xeliefp3oleq3g54
>>>> 
>>>> -sebastien
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> o: 303.746.7302
>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
>> <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Daan


Mime
View raw message