groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shil Sinha <shil.si...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ANN] New committer: Shil Sinha
Date Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:18:11 GMT
Thanks Pascal! The only other question I have is, what's the difference
between the 2_4_X and 2_4_x branches?

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Pascal Schumacher <pascalschumacher@gmx.net
> wrote:

> Welcome Shils! :)
>
> Am 20.10.2015 um 22:41 schrieb Shil Sinha:
>
>
> BTW, I think it's still a good idea to use PRs for a short period of time,
>> so that you can accommodate with our dev process. In particular, how
>> patches should be applied on master and cherry picked on maintenance
>> branches.
>
>
> I committed a small change to master and cherry picked it to 2_4_X
> yesterday, hope that was ok.
>
> Yes that was fine. In my opinion you do not need to create a pull request
> for small changes like this one (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-groovy/commit/d6497413f6e94f9b66e0d2853ef1ac21d00c1f98
> ).
>
> I'll continue using PRs going forward for the time being.
> As far as merging pull requests, I read through a few of the dev threads
> from when Groovy migrated to Apache, but couldn't find a definitive
> workflow. Is that documented anywhere? If not, I can write it as I get
> familiar.
>
> I use
>
> git fetch https://github.com/<contributor>/incubator-groovy.git
> <pull-request-branch>
> git cherry-pick <commit(s) of the pull request>
> git commit -a --amend --> to add "(closes #<pull-request-number>) at the
> end of the title"
>
> BTW: I prefer a model where committers are also supposed to go through
>> pull request / review processes. I believe that does not decrease
>> productivity, but has a range of beneficial effects. Becoming a
>> committer should ideally just mean the ability to approve and merge
>> other people's pull requests/patches.
>
>
> I find this beneficial as well, for code changes. It's a useful way to
> keep up with the codebase, rather than just browsing commits.
>
> I also think this is beneficial for improving quality and spreading
> knowledge. But the reviews have to be done in a timely manner and at the
> moment we are to slow to even review pull request (imho). So we use this
> model only of for very important changes or when are unsure about a change.
>
> -Pascal
>

Mime
View raw message