ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Jira Process
Date Mon, 27 Jul 2015 06:13:40 GMT
On 27.07.2015 07:47, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 10:39 PM, Branko ─îibej <brane@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 27.07.2015 07:04, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
>>> Igniters,
>>> I believe several very valid points have been made on the general@ list
>>> about our Jira handling, and how we should improve our Jira process.
>>> I have tried to outline the Jira Process we should follow on our Wiki:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Jira+Process
>>> Please review and provide comments. Let's try to finalize it within the
>>> next couple of days.
>> This describes a commit-then-review process. This is absolutely not what
>> you want. There is no need to ask for patch review before committing;
>> this should happen after commit. The only case where the ticket review
>> stage makes sense is when someone who is not a committer is writing the
>> patch; or when the committer feels she needs extra eyes on the change.
> Brane, I am not sure if I understood you correctly. The process that I
> would like to see in Ignite is that absolutely every ticket undergoes a
> review process before it gets merged to the main master branch, regardless
> of whether it is done by a committer or not.
> Are you suggesting that the review process for committers should be
> optional?

Yes of course. The default process for making changes should be: commit,
then review (CTR). This means that any committer can make any change
without asking for a review first, and other committers review the
changes after the commit.

What you're proposing is the review, then commit (RTC) process, which a)
implies that you don't trust committers even for trivial changes, b)
slows down development and c) IMO is contrary to the spirit of open
source. A committer should know when a change really needs review before
committing, otherwise you shouldn't have made her a committer in the
first place.

My point in that discussion thread is that you guys are using Jira far
too much for trivial stuff. It's a waste of time and resources to go
through all the Jira steps for simple changes; instead, you should learn
to write descriptive commit log messages and use Jira only for tracking
large changes or bugs that can't be addressed immediately.

As it stands, you're proposing to change an open development process
into a bureaucratic nightmare. Please don't.

-- Brane

View raw message