flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ufuk Celebi <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Question about Commit Policy
Date Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:51:50 GMT
+1

@Stephan: thanks! :-)

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> Since the feedback was positive, I added the guidelines to the wiki, with a
> disclaimer that this is being refined.
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+development+guidelines
>
> Stephan
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Kostas Tzoumas <ktzoumas@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Let's encourage the use of component tags, I don't see the need for
> > enforcing it. For commits that affect one component, I expect people will
> > use it.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhueske@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for the guide and JIRA references.
> > >
> > > I'd keep the component tags optional though.
> > > As Max said, there is less space to display a meaning message if a
> commit
> > > addresses several components. Separating changes into commits by
> > components
> > > sounds not very practical to me.
> > > Also without a clear definition of when to add which component tag, we
> > > cannot rely on them anyway.
> > >
> > > Git should also have better tools than browsing commit messages when
> > > looking for a commit that changed specific code.
> > >
> > > 2015-01-07 15:24 GMT+01:00 Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > > I personally like the tags very much. I think the streaming component
> > was
> > > > the first to introduce it and it stuck me as a very good idea.
> > > >
> > > > +1 to stick with them
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Márton Balassi <
> > balassi.marton@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I prefer component declarations, the current best practice comes
in
> > > handy
> > > > > when searching through commits. Answering a "when did key selection
> > > > change
> > > > > for streaming?" type question I just had to answer would have been
> a
> > > bit
> > > > > more difficult without it - manageable though.
> > > > >
> > > > > In case of streaming it does not yield much to omit the component
> > > > > declaration, most of the time then we would need to add it to the
> > > commit
> > > > > message itself, e.g. :
> > > > > "[streaming] Join API rework", could be e.g. rewritten as "Join API
> > > > rework
> > > > > for streaming". I do prefer the former one, because it is not only
> > more
> > > > > straight-forward to understand, but a bit shorter as well.
> > > > > Of course there are counter-examples, like "[streaming] DataStream
> > > > > refactor" -> "DataStream refactor".
> > > > >
> > > > > I can accept optional, but would like to keep it strongly
> recommended
> > > for
> > > > > streaming. I also find the [docs] tag helpful.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Should we put that to an official vote, or wait for people to
> > comment
> > > > and
> > > > > > (if nobody objects) consider it as agreed on through lazy
> > consensus?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Márton Balassi <
> > > > balassi.marton@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 for the guide, thanks for clarifying the issue
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Till Rohrmann <
> > > trohrmann@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Aljoscha Krettek
<
> > > > > aljoscha@apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yes, we should have a guide like that somewhere.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Stephan Ewen
<
> > > sewen@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We have not exactly defined this so far,
but it is a good
> > > point
> > > > > to
> > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > so.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I personally find it good to have changes
associated with
> > an
> > > > > issue,
> > > > > > > > > because
> > > > > > > > > > it allows you to trace back why the change
was done.
> > > > > > > > > > To make sure we do not overdo this and impose
totally
> > > > unnecessary
> > > > > > > > > overhead,
> > > > > > > > > > I would suggest the following:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > *No issue is required for*
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - Small fixes like typos, simple warnings,
> > > adding/improving a
> > > > > > > comment
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - Adding and improving existing pages
of the
> > documentation
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - Simple improvements of style / elegance
/ efficiency
> > > > (simple
> > > > > > > > > rewriting
> > > > > > > > > > a loop / condition / method interaction)
if no behavior
> is
> > > > > changed
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ==> Basically anything that does not
change or add
> > > > functionality
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > *An issue is required for*
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Everything else, in particular:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - Anything that changes functionality
or behavior
> > relevant
> > > to
> > > > > > users
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - Anything that changes functionality
or behavior
> > relevant
> > > to
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > > > > > components
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - Anything that adds a feature
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I would vote to allow coarse issues and
have multiple
> > commits
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > reference it
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [FLINK-1234] [runtime] Runtime support some
cool new
> thing
> > > > > > > > > > [FLINK-1234] [java api] Add hook for cool
thing to java
> api
> > > > > > > > > > [FLINK-1234] [scala api] Add hook for that
thing to scala
> > api
> > > > > > > > > > [FLINK-1234] [optimizer] Make optimizer
aware that it can
> > > > exploit
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > thing
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The guide lines for pull-requests for committers
are as
> > > > follows:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > *A pull request with comments/additional
signoff is
> > required
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > anything
> > > > > > > > > > that*
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - breaks the public APIs
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - adds methods to the public APIs (that
will need to be
> > > kept
> > > > > > stable
> > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > them on)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - alters user-facing behavior (e.g., mutability
of
> types,
> > > > null
> > > > > > > value
> > > > > > > > > > handling, window semantics, ...)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - adds user-facing knobs (switches, config
parameters,
> > > > > execution
> > > > > > > > option
> > > > > > > > > > on the execution environment)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - adds additional maven dependencies
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - changes the way components interact
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >   - touches highly sensitive and performance
critical
> > parts,
> > > > such
> > > > > > > > memory
> > > > > > > > > > management or network stack
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ==> Changes that come with a pull request
should have one
> > or
> > > > more
> > > > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > > > associated with them.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Anyone that wants to have comments or some
additional
> pairs
> > > of
> > > > > eyes
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > code should make a pull request as well.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > *Naming scheme for commits*
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [issue] [component] Message
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > For fixes without an issue, the issue can
be dropped.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What do you think? Should we put this into
the Wiki?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Greetings,
> > > > > > > > > > Stephan
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha
Krettek <
> > > > > > > aljoscha@apache.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > > I feel we never really talked about
this. So, should we
> > > open
> > > > > Jira
> > > > > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > > > > even for very small fixes and then
add the ticket
> number
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > commit?
> > > > > > > > > > Or
> > > > > > > > > > > should we just commit those small fixes.
Right now, I
> > have
> > > > two
> > > > > > > small
> > > > > > > > > > fixes
> > > > > > > > > > > (one is 4 lines, the other one is two
lines) for the
> > > > > > ValueTypeInfo
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > TextValueInputFormat. Very obscure
stuff, I know. :D
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > > > Aljoscha
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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