incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Adrian Cole <adrian.f.c...@gmail.com>
Subject RE: Patches review
Date Mon, 18 Jun 2012 20:17:33 GMT
+1 gerrit, particularly as it helps avoid additional process mismatches for
folks working in both openstack and cloudstack
On Jun 18, 2012 2:07 PM, "Ewan Mellor" <Ewan.Mellor@eu.citrix.com> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fred Wittekind [mailto:rom@twister.dyndns.org]
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> Personally, I've always submitted patches via attaching them to bug
> > >> reports.  Works well when I find a bug in something, don't have time
> > to
> > >> wait on anyone else to fix it, so I fix it myself, attach it to a
> > bug
> > >> report, and hope it's in the next release so I don't have to deal
> > with
> > >> it again.  Works pretty good with most open source projects.
> > >>
> > >> Fred Wittekind
> > >>
> > > So I have seen a lot of folks who use this approach, but that
> > > typically means that the mailing list gets cced on every action in
> > the
> > > bugtracker. (mailing lists are where everything happens in Apache
> > > projects) We are already on track to hit 1,000 messages on this list
> > > alone this month - are we sure we want to add Jira traffic to that
> > > volume?
> > >
> > > --David
> > >
> > If we don't use the project's bug tracker to track the progress of bugs
> > and there patches, doesn't that defeat the purpose of having it?
> >
> > Keeping the patch file attachments in Jira would keep those file
> > attachments out of the mailing list (reduction of traffic), and we
> > wouldn't run into MTA/MUAs mangling them.
> >
> > If someone makes a comment in Jira, then CCs the mailing list, that
> > isn't any more mailing list traffic than sending to the same thing to
> > the mailing list alone.
>
> Hi,
>
> I want to keep this thread alive, because this is an important decision in
> front of us, and the thread died on Wednesday without getting very far.
>
> I think we're all agreed that we want to get patches out of email and into
> a tool that's better designed for peer review, automated test, and merge.
>  So that's the decision that's ahead of us -- what tool do we want to use
> for this?
>
> In my opinion, Jira is a _fantastic_ bug tracker, but it's a poor tool for
> reviewing patches.  The best systems that I have seen will use a dedicated
> review tool, and will reflect details back to the bug tracker for archive.
>  That way, anyone looking at the bug can find the review discussion and see
> when a fix was merged, but the actual review itself can happen in a tool
> designed for the job.
>
> I know of two decent options: Gerrit from the Google Android team, and
> ReviewBoard.  I've seen Gerrit used very successfully in the past.  I don't
> know anything about ReviewBoard, other than the fact that there is an
> instance hosted at reviews.apache.org.  (It was also down last week,
> which is a concern, but I'm sure we could address any instability problems
> if we wanted to depend on it.)
>
> Does anyone have any other tools that we should look at, or comments on
> either Gerrit or ReviewBoard?
>
> The next step from here would be to pick one or two to evaluate, and put
> together a workflow for patch acceptance that we can all agree on.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ewan.
>
>

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