Mailing-List: contact callback-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of brian.leroux@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.210.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: brian.leroux@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACAoQH2GPQs1F=EaKLLrsX5kEiteiOk+46VMA8fnCerGva6SNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CACAoQH1NLG-KmsLU-9AArnxKqdXNixprAYocu2yPsgd3PJ+1xg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACAoQH2GPQs1F=EaKLLrsX5kEiteiOk+46VMA8fnCerGva6SNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:04:17 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CADVgkyMWfJbTbm0vSWj-UinCiESCcj5H4+gPQwvpcrgqbAHwnA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: who wants to play with me on a commit approval process for
 weinre?
From: Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jukka: Very curious about how we can help infra w/ the stuff Patrick
is describing here. We have it in our queue to block out some
resources to improve our testing automation. This is close enough that
the work could be combined. Just don't know the implications to Apache
infrastructure.

Patrick: I'd like to help on this. We could cobble this together on
our own servers to get things going. Appears we could use the Jira
rest api: http://docs.atlassian.com/jira/REST/latest/


On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Patrick Mueller <pmuellr@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:32, Patrick Mueller <pmuellr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering if someone would like to experiment with me on getting an
>> approval process in place for commits.
>>
>
> BTW, I'd be interested in finding out about other Apache project's commit
> processes.
>
> Probably the most interesting commit process for a non-Apache project I'v=
e
> seen is WebKit's. =A0It goes like this:
>
> - open a bug
> - when you have code ready to commit, add the patch as an attachment to t=
he
> bug; there's a command-line script that will do this for you
> - WebKit's Bugzilla knows about these attachments, and provides a mechani=
sm
> for you to signal that a commit needs a review, that the commit has passe=
d
> review, and that the commit has failed review.
> - the reviewer signals pass/fail on the review
> - if the review passes, the code is automagically comitted and a build is
> done
>
> Since I've been involved, they've taken this one step further, in that yo=
u
> can have a build run against your patch without having it committed to th=
e
> SCM. =A0This is a substitute for the presumed step of the reviewer applyi=
ng
> the patch and making sure things till work. =A0Again, there's an indicato=
r in
> Bugzilla to show you the status of this build.
>
> But wait, there's more!
>
> - all this stuff is logged to IRC as well as other obvious channels (bug
> emails, scm emails, etc)
> - there's an IRC bot that can be used to automagically "back out" a
> committed patch by creating a new bug and a "reverse patch", then applyin=
g
> it and committing it.
>
> It's a pretty nice system, but obviously relies on:
>
> - some automation code running in various places
> - extending the bug system to take all this stuff into account
>
> All in all, it's quite nice - everything revolves around Bugzilla.
>
> Anything else in this vein available at Apache?
>
> --
> Patrick Mueller
> http://muellerware.org