htrace-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Github integration
Date Wed, 22 Apr 2015 02:08:32 GMT
I would associate the upswing in introductions to increased marketing from
joining incubator; orthogonal to moving out of github.

No one has suggested moving away from patches attached to JIRA. As I said,
patch on JIRA is what we'll eventually need for pre-commit checking anyway.

I'd like the github mirror to be activated, which Jake has done. I'd
also like PR's to show up as a mail to the dev list and, if possible, also
land on the associated JIRA as a comment. I maintain that this will make it
easier for non-Apache folks who fork-and-PR to get our attention without
much fuss on either end.

Does your -1 apply to PRs resulting in a mail on the dev list?

-n

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, Colin P. McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org> wrote:

> The argument keeps getting made that we have to be on github "to make
> it easy for outsiders to contribute" but I don't see any evidence to
> back that up.  Quite the contrary, during the time HTrace was a github
> project, the number of contributions and contributors were much
> smaller than now.
>
> Objectively, the JIRA workflow is not difficult to learn.  The number
> of new and recent contributors that Hadoop has is a testament to that.
> And many other very successful projects use the same model.  I would
> argue that to the average developer, attaching a text file to a JIRA
> is easier to understand than creating a branch and a pull request in
> github.  It's certainly easier for a first-timer than the upload
> process of reviewboard or gerrit.
>
> I think if we are being honest with ourselves, the only valid reason
> to switch away from patch attachments on JIRA is the convenience of
> developers.  Elliot has said that he doesn't like having to click on
> "attach patch."  Some things that haven't been brought up, but which
> ought to be, are that reviews in JIRA require some cut-n-paste, and
> that you need to install a Google Chrome extension to see side-by-side
> diffs.
>
> My opinion is that while these things are kind of annoying, they're
> really not that bad.  Having to explain what the difference is in my
> latest patch versus the previous one takes much more time and mental
> effort than clicking on "attach patch."  There are even scripts out
> there to automatically attach patches.  Copying a few lines to the
> clipboard to suggest changes during a review isn't bad... in some ways
> I prefer it to clicking all those "expand discussion" arrows in other
> code review tools.
>
> Colin
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > There's a joke here about N devs in a room and N opinions that are all
> right
> > (and all wrong)!
> >
> > All I'm asking for here is to make it easy for outsiders to contribute.
> > Having HTrace show up in the mirror is a big step. The next logical
> thing is
> > folks will click the fork button. We should be ready to receive the
> incoming
> > help; the details of that implementation are less important to me.
> >
> > Whatever our individual opinions, GH is a defacto place for developers
> these
> > days -- their tools are extremely well socialized. It's a shame to cut
> > ourselves off from users of that community. I happen to share Colin's
> > opinions about the inferiority of GH's interface for historical comments
> (I
> > personally like gerrit the best of the tools I've used), but that doesn't
> > mean we should shun it. (I also generally loath JIRA, on par with
> Elliott's
> > thoughts).
> >
> > I think the Apache infra allows comments on PRs that are tied to a JIRA
> to
> > land in the comments on the associated JIRA. Is that right Jake? It
> doesn't
> > prevent the patch from disappearing from github, but at least the trail
> of
> > discussion is preserved and the "single page scroll down" consumption is
> > still possible. I think we as a project can make it a policy that a patch
> > must be attached to the JIRA, not just living in a PR (we'll want that
> for
> > pre-commit build bot support anyway, right?) Use the PR as another means
> of
> > review, not the source of truth on the the change itself. Would that be
> > enough for you Colin?
> >
> > On the topic of Gerrit, there was a discussion about bringing it about
> for
> > Apache projects. It's been raised and died and raised a number of times.
> > Gerrit for reviews and push gating + github style build hook detection
> would
> > be a great setup for me as well. Maybe we should investigate that as a
> > separate thread?
> >
> > -n
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> For me pull requests show great history for the issue if things don't
> get
> >> bounced around too many different creators. Github really struggles when
> >> there are issues that hang around for a long time, either because they
> don't
> >> have patches yet, or because lots of different people are creating
> candidate
> >> patches. However for me email copies of everything that's from github
> >> provide all the search-ability that I would need to just use github.
> >>
> >> However for me Jira is just so disconnected from the code that it's a
> >> total time sink. I want to create code, look at code, and have my code
> >> tested.  Every time I have to create a patch and attach it it's a total
> >> context switch (better than RB but that's not saying much). The
> integration
> >> of jira and jenkins just feels like duct-tape and hope when compared to
> the
> >> hooks provided by github. So for me jira seems bad at creating patches,
> >> reviewing patches, and testing patches.
> >>
> >> I've used gerrit before and it's awesome. Just a joy to use once things
> >> are set up and moving. However I don't think that it will work since
> it's
> >> not supported by infra and it needs to be the source of truth for a git
> >> repo.
> >>
> >> My preferences, in order, would be
> >>
> >> * Gerrit
> >> * Github only
> >> * Github with Jira integration
> >> * Phabricator with jira
> >> * Review board
> >> * Jira only
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Colin P. McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org
> <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Pull requests aren't a replacement for JIRA, because they don't allow
> >>> you to see the history of an issue over time, link it to other issues,
> >>> post pictures or other observations, talk to the community, and so on.
> >>> In a word, github isn't a bug tracker.  And the bug tracker that
> >>> github does offer is very inadequate... even projects that go entirely
> >>> github usually use an external bug tracker for this reason.
> >>>
> >>> I agree that reviewboard is a bad experience.  The big issue with RB
> >>> has always been that it's clunky to post patches.  With JIRA, for all
> >>> it's faults, I just click "attach file," select the file, and go.
> >>> With RB, I have to fill out a form reminiscent of an IRS 1040 every
> >>> time I post a patch.  Yes, I realize there are uploader scripts.  But
> >>> after my uploader script broke the third time, I just decided it
> >>> wasn't worth it and used the RB interface from then on.  I just don't
> >>> have time to debug uploader problems, especially things like "you
> >>> forgot to use --full-index, now I'm going to say 'file doesn't exist
> >>> in project'"
> >>>
> >>> Jake, can you go into more detail about how Crucible is "slow and
> >>> painful to use"?  Do you mean that the interface is not responsive?  I
> >>> haven't used Crucible before, but I would be up for evaluating it.
> >>>
> >>> I would be up for evaluating gerrit IF we had a plugin that mirrored
> >>> the gerrit comments to JIRA so that they were indexable and searchable
> >>> through normal means.  I have used gerrit before.  It offers a great
> >>> uploading experience (just do "git push"), a GUI for making comments
> >>> on patches, and the ability to submit a patch with one click.
> >>>
> >>> Colin
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
> <javascript:;>>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I'm a fan of reviewboard and think that the
> >>> >> projects that have used it have had little issues with it
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Uggggh review board's never been a good experience for me. If I had
> my
> >>> > druthers I'd go all github all the time. Drop jira completely. For
me
> >>> > the
> >>> > pull requests ui is just much closer to how I work.
> >>
> >>
> >
>

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