cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rafael Weingärtner <rafaelweingart...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Relax strict requirement of JIRA ID for PRs
Date Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:58:35 GMT
I meant a way of describing them (changes/proposals) further. Sometimes we
have commits only with title, and then the Jira ticket would be a way of
documenting that commit. I do prefer the idea of inserting the whole
description in the commit body though. [for me] it looks easier to work
directly with commits and PRs; as you said, we can generate release notes
based on commits directly [and issues on GH]. However, for that, we need to
fine-tune our workflow.


On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com> wrote:

> I am +1 to relaxing the requirement of Jira ticket.
>
> Rafael, what do you mean when you say "Jira tickets are used to register
> changes"?
>
> I think ever since 4.9 the actual PRs included in the code are the source
> of truth for the changes in the actual code (at least from a release notes
> perspective).  This is why the release notes can show changes that only
> have PRs and no Jira ticket.  At least my release notes generator is built
> that way.  I think Rohit has built a similar release notes generator, so I
> can't speak to his version...
>
> *Will Stevens*
> Chief Technology Officer
> c 514.826.0190
>
> <https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 6:42 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
> rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Marc, yes Jira tickets are used to register changes. However, what Rohit
> > and others (including me) are noticing is that there are certain types of
> > changes (minor/bureaucracy) that do not require Jira tickets. The issue
> is
> > the wording “change”. What consist of a change that is worth mentioning
> in
> > the release notes? Everything we do in a branch is a change towards a
> > release, but not everything is useful for operators/administrators to
> see.
> >
> > I would say that to fix bugs, introduce new features, extend existing
> > features, introduce a major change in the code such as that standard
> maven
> > thing that you did, they all required Jira tickets to track the
> discussion
> > and facilitate the management. On the other side of the spectrum, we have
> > things such as removing dead/unused code, opening a new version (creating
> > the upgrade path that we still use for the DB), fix a description in an
> API
> > method, and so on. Moreover, the excessive use of Jira tickets leads to
> > hundreds of Jira tickets that we do not know that status of. We have
> quite
> > a big number of tickets opened that could be closed. This has been worse;
> > we are improving as time goes by.
> >
> > I would say that to make this more transparent to others (especially
> > newcomers), we need to discuss it, then write it down to make it
> > transparent the way we are working.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Marc-Aurèle Brothier <marco@exoscale.ch
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > That's a good idea, because people are more and more used to only
> create
> > PR
> > > on github, and it would be helpful to be more explanatory on the way we
> > > work to push changes. I still think we should encourage the use of the
> > > github milestone as Rohit did with the 4.11.0 (
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/milestone/3?closed=1) to list the
> > > changes in the release notes with the help of the labels to tag the PRs
> > > instead of relying on the jira ticket (it requires to have another
> > login).
> > >
> > > As far as I can remember, the JIRA tickets are used to list the changes
> > of
> > > a release, but nothing else. Or am I missing something?
> > >
> > > Marc-Aurèle
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Rohit Yadav <
> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To make it easier for people to contribute changes and encourage
> > > > PR/contributions, should we relax the requirement of a JIRA ticket
> for
> > > pull
> > > > requests that solve trivial/minor issues such as doc bugs, build
> fixes
> > > etc?
> > > > A JIRA ticket may still be necessary for new features and non-trivial
> > > > bugfixes or changes.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Another alternative could be to introduce a CONTRIBUTING.md [1] that
> > > > explains the list of expected things to contributors when they send a
> > PR
> > > > (for example, a jira id, links to fs or other resources, a short
> > summary
> > > > and long description, test results etc).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://help.github.com/articles/setting-guidelines-
> > > > for-repository-contributors/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Rohit
> > > >
> > > > <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> > > > www.shapeblue.com
> > > > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> > > > @shapeblue
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rafael Weingärtner
> >
>



-- 
Rafael Weingärtner

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message