htrace-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jake Farrell <jfarr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Github integration
Date Tue, 21 Apr 2015 22:34:16 GMT
Hey Colin
Agree about losing comments in Github and that jira should be the source
for the communication on issues. Not all projects that enable the github
mirroring and integrations use it for code review or to accept pull
requests, one example of this is Aurora. Huge -1 from me for Crucible, its
too slow and painful to use. I'm a fan of reviewboard and think that the
projects that have used it have had little issues with it

-Jake

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Colin P. McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> Thanks for opening a [DISCUSS] thread.
>
> I am -1 on the concept of using github as our code review tool, for a
> few reasons.  The biggest reason is just the "split system" effect.  I
> don't want to have to search a separate system to see the patch that
> would formerly have been attached to a JIRA.  Sometimes I want to
> search for a particular comment that someone made.  I can do this
> through JIRA full text search, but I can't do it through github.  I
> would like the discussion of the JIRA, to appear on the JIRA, not some
> other place.   I would like to be able to learn everything I need,
> just from watching the jira, and not have to scramble to other 3rd
> party websites.
>
> I don't think comments about the JIRA can always be cleanly separated
> into comments about the patch and comments about the idea.  if I want
> to make meta-comments about an approach, where do they go?  People
> will stop reading JIRA if all the action is on github.  But github is
> apparently only for detailed patch comments.
>
> From an interface point of view, I just don't like github's interface.
> I admit that this is somewhat of a matter of opinion, but it's how I
> feel.  I don't like how each new patch version you post hides the
> comments from the previous version.  It makes it difficult to follow
> the thread of the conversation because I have to keep clicking on
> "expand" arrows constantly, whereas with JIRA I could just read from
> top to bottom.
>
> I have found that projects that used github heavily, such as Spark,
> had problems with multiple PRs being opened for the same issue.  The
> people didn't know about each others' PR.  JIRA was often not updated
> with the results of discussions on github, and JIRA summaries for that
> project could be very misleading.  They build some custom tooling to
> try to alleviate this problem, but it's a problem we just wouldn't
> have if we stuck with JIRA.
>
> If the concern is that we need a better code review tool, how about
> Crucible?  That integrates with JIRA rather than being a separate
> system.
>
> best,
> Colin
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > We have that available also, when a pr is created we can launch a jenkins
> > run for a given project and jenkins will comment back on that pr when its
> > done with the status. Also for Phoenix I enabled it in the filter for the
> > pre-commit last night
> >
> > -Jake
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jake --
> >>
> >> While I'm making requests of Infra, it would be super-cool if the
> >> Pre-Commit bot could detect a PR the same way it detects a patch. Then
> we
> >> could have our pre-commit scrips pull down the change, and run it like a
> >> patch through the project's usual process. Better still would be if
> Apache
> >> could provide a template for projects to follow. In another thread, I'm
> >> adding pre commit for Phoenix, which is going to end up using a fork of
> >> HBase's.. which is itself a fork of Hadoop's. One base script that does
> most
> >> of the heavy lifting that we all can inherit from and extend with
> >> project-specific additions would be really helpful, especially for when
> I
> >> get around to adding pre-commit for HTrace too ;)
> >>
> >> -n
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Colin, thanks for making this a DISCUSS thread ;)
> >>>
> >>> I'm not suggesting switching away from JIRA. What I want is to make it
> as
> >>> easy as possible for non-Apache folks to find and contribute to HTrace,
> >>> through the following:
> >>>  (0) mirror our repo to the github.com/apache account
> >>>  (1) allow folks to submit a PR against that account and have it arrive
> >>> meaningfully to the community. On other projects, I've seen this
> result in a
> >>> mail to dev@
> >>>
> >>> After that it's up for discussion. I think PR's and RB are a better
> place
> >>> for deconstructing a large patch than comments on a JIRA. Github has
> the
> >>> advantage over apache RB of being the most visible code review tool out
> >>> there, so it benefits our project by participating. I also don't think
> it's
> >>> a big deal to review patches on PR. Just like with RB, it's external
> to JIRA
> >>> and that's okay, so long as it's clear that there's a non-JIRA resource
> >>> associated with the ticket. For initial contributions that originate
> on a
> >>> PR, it's obvious where to look for additional discussion. It's the
> exact
> >>> same as looking to RB or Fabricator for patch comments. It's up to the
> >>> contributor and the sponsor committed to be aware of these threads.
> >>>
> >>> I am absolutely NOT suggesting we replace JIRA with github issue
> tracker
> >>> or pushing commits that lack and associated JIRA.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks Jake for the docs on how Thrift integrates with GH, that's what
> I
> >>> was looking for.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hey Colin
> >>>> I don't think there was any intention of switching away from jira,
> just
> >>>> enabling the github integrations for the project to accept patches
> from
> >>>> github. For Thrift we require that all github pull requests have a
> jira
> >>>> associated with them, for exactly as you point out, its hard to track
> >>>> everything in split systems
> >>>>
> >>>> -Jake
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Colin P. McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi guys,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have an objection.  In the past, I've found it frustrating to
> search
> >>>>> through github pull requests.  There is no interface (like there
is
> on
> >>>>> JIRA) to search using any kind of structured query language, and
we
> >>>>> don't have the tools to track things by release, contributor, etc.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If we start having some of our patch discussions on github, JIRA
will
> >>>>> become a lot less useful.  We might run into a situation like on
> Spark
> >>>>> where people open multiple pull requests for the same thing, not
> >>>>> knowing about each other.  Or people have a discussion on JIRA,
not
> >>>>> aware that a parallel discussion is going on on github.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think we should take more time to think this through.  1 hour
is
> not
> >>>>> enough time to decide to switch away from JIRA :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> best,
> >>>>> Colin
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>> > Once Github picks up the mirror i'll enable the remaining
> >>>>> > integrations
> >>>>> > steps so we will start getting notices on our dev@ list and
can
> close
> >>>>> > our
> >>>>> > pull requests through commits. Here are some docs I did for
Thrift
> >>>>> > that
> >>>>> > would be good to adopt or change for how people contribute
or
> commit
> >>>>> > to
> >>>>> > HTrace.
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > http://thrift.apache.org/docs/HowToContribute
> >>>>> > http://thrift.apache.org/docs/committers/HowToCommit
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > If you have any other questions let me know
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > -Jake
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Nick Dimiduk <
> ndimiduk@apache.org>
> >>>>> > wrote:
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> >> That was fast, thanks Jake :)
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> What else do we need to to to get the fancy PR integration
i've
> seen
> >>>>> >> in
> >>>>> >> other projects? I see there's a specific task type for
that on
> INFRA
> >>>>> >> Jira.
> >>>>> >> Is there a doc for Apacheer-but-not-githubbers on what
the
> workflow
> >>>>> >> looks
> >>>>> >> like? Or is it just read the Github docs on PR's?
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> Thanks,
> >>>>> >> Nick
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Jake Farrell <
> jfarrell@apache.org>
> >>>>> >> wrote:
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>> Hey Eliott
> >>>>> >>> Great idea, I have setup the git.a.o mirror for us
and will
> enable
> >>>>> >>> the
> >>>>> >>> Github integrations as soon as Github picks up the
repo from
> >>>>> >>> git.a.o
> >>>>> >>> (usually within 24 hours)
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>> -Jake
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Elliott Clark <
> eclark@apache.org>
> >>>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>> > That would be great.
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Nick Dimiduk
> >>>>> >>> > <ndimiduk@apache.org>
> >>>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > > Do we have any kind of github integration
setup? I can't even
> >>>>> >>> > > find a
> >>>>> >>> > mirror
> >>>>> >>> > > of HTrace on the apache account. I think
we'll make it easier
> >>>>> >>> > > for
> >>>>> >>> folks
> >>>>> >>> > to
> >>>>> >>> > > contribute if they can send PR's.
> >>>>> >>> > >
> >>>>> >>> > > I'd like to open an INFRA ticket to get us
setup with this
> >>>>> >>> integration.
> >>>>> >>> > Are
> >>>>> >>> > > there any objections?
> >>>>> >>> > >
> >>>>> >>> > > Thanks,
> >>>>> >>> > > Nick
> >>>>> >>> > >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

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