cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Lunny <alu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Can we talk about large features before they arrive in master?
Date Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:57:54 GMT
Outsider observation/note: probably useful for step 4 to tie into the CI -
getting the pull request to notify Fil's CI project.

On 22 January 2013 10:53, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org> wrote:

> Here's a draft for a new "Committing Your Own Changes:" section on
> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CommitterWorkflow
>
> Step 1: Mail the Mailing-list
>   - This is required if:
>     - Your change will add/remove/change any public Cordova APIs.
>     - You suspect that your change has a chance of being controversial
>     - You would like feedback before you begin.
>
> When possible, try to phrase things in the form of a proposal. If no one
> objects (within a workday or two), then consider yourself to have Lazy
> Consensus <http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus>.
>
> Step 2: Ensure there is a JIRA issue.
>   - JIRA issues are used for both new features and for bugs.
>   - The "Fix For" field is used for the purpose of Release Notes.
>   - The issues are also used to track which commits / topic branches are
> related to them.
>
> Step 3: Create a topic branch
>   - Using a public topic branch is necessary only when either:
>      1. you would like to collaborate on the feature
>      2. you would like feedback on your code before committing
>   - For small bugfixes, public topic branches are not required.
>   - Note: You should never rebase a public topic branch!
>
> Step 4: Ask for a code review
>   - If you are using a public topic branch, then you should ask for a code
> review when you consider it to be complete.
>   - For now, use a github pull request. Soon, use reviews.apache.org.
>   - Email the ML so that anyone who is available can have a look at your
> code. If you have someone in particular that you would like approval from,
> be sure to add them in the To: of your email.
>   - Again, sometimes this will end with a Lazy
> Consensus<http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus>
> .
>
> Step 5: Merge your change
>   - Once your topic branch is tested & working, it's time to merge it. Use
> the following workflow:
>
> git checkout master
> git pull apache master
> git checkout topic_branch
> git checkout -b to_be_merged
> git rebase master -i
> ...
> git checkout master
> git merge --ff-only to_be_merged
> git push apache master
> git branch -d to_be_merged
> git branch -D topic_branch
> git push apache :topic_branch
>
> The rebase -i step is your chance to clean up the commit messages and to
> combine small commits when appropriate. For example:
> Commit A: Implemented RockOn feature (CB-1234)
> Commit B: Added tests for RockOn (CB-1234)
> Commit C: Fixed RockOn not working with empty strings
> Commit D: Renamed RockOn to JustRock
> Commit E: Refactor MainFeature to make use of JustRock.
>
> In this case, it would be appropriate to combine commits A-D into a single
> commit, or at least commits A & C. Having a smaller number of commits when
> merging makes it easier for others to comprehend the diff commits, and also
> makes it easier to roll-back commits should the need arise. For JS commits,
> prefix the message with [platform] so that it's clear who should take
> interest in the commit. For all commits, be sure to include the JIRA issue
> number / URL.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Code reviews will generally sound good to Googlers, so long as we can
> keep
> > the turnaround down. It definitely keeps our code quality high on
> internal
> > projects, even if it is sometimes a pain to have to wait for a response
> and
> > do your own reviews. I've asked Michal and Andrew for over-the-shoulder
> iOS
> > reviews in the past, since I'm new to that platform.
> >
> > I also want to apologize for the trouble with the ArrayBuffers on
> Android.
> > I was running into the bug with navigating in mobile-spec causing
> > deviceready not to fire, and had just changed my start page to the binary
> > echo test Michal wrote. It started working, so I cleaned up my debugging
> > and pushed. That was premature, since I broke some of the tests and
> hadn't
> > run the automatic tests. Gomen nasai.
> >
> >
> > Braden
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > ReviewBoard seems like a great fit to me! Let's try it out!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Brian M Dube <bdube@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 01/21/2013 01:24 PM, Joe Bowser wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Andrew Grieve <
> agrieve@chromium.org
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> As for code reviews:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'd certainly be interested in more code-reviews. I think it's
> > really
> > > > >> useful to get feedback on changes. The only time when it becomes
a
> > > > burden
> > > > >> is when turn-around time gets too long (e.g. you submit for review
> > and
> > > > no
> > > > >> one looks at it for over a day).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Up until now, we've been using the github pull-request interface
> to
> > > have
> > > > >> others review our changes, but this isn't done very frequently.
I
> > also
> > > > >> don't love this approach because comments through it don't get
> > posted
> > > > back
> > > > >> to the cordova mailing-list.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not super thrilled by this either, because our GitHub pull
> > request
> > > > > system is completely broken since we can't actually close requests
> > and
> > > > > indicate when we think things are a good idea or not. I think we
> > > > > should do what Android does with Gerrit (see
> > > > > https://android-review.googlesource.com) , but that'll involve
> > > > > additional infrastructure and another war with INFRA about whether
> > > > > it's the Apache way or whatever.
> > > >
> > > > An instance of ReviewBoard [1] exists at Apache [2], so I don't think
> > it
> > > > means war about the Apache way. Is that something that could fill
> this
> > > > need?
> > > >
> > > > Brian
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://reviews.apache.org/
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/reviewboard_instance_running_at_the
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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