Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 284FE2007D1 for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 16:04:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 26DF0160939; Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:11 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 4BADA1602BF for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 16:04:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 29919 invoked by uid 500); 12 May 2016 14:04:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@taverna.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@taverna.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@taverna.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 29905 invoked by uid 99); 12 May 2016 14:04:09 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:09 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 0A4BEC929D for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.436 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.436 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=2, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.416] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rJ9hkSCmQPwr for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with SMTP id 67F805FCDC for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 29896 invoked by uid 99); 12 May 2016 14:04:05 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:05 +0000 Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 2F8621A010E for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id a17so138081193wme.0 for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 07:04:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVSnwhnUGz1zMrEk22RSI0BNovlkOyIXcb1718Ph5Vqn5seC27khPNaT0rHRNAJwSspTb5dc2teyFFRMw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.28.221.193 with SMTP id u184mr6436466wmg.33.1463061843383; Thu, 12 May 2016 07:04:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.28.15.68 with HTTP; Thu, 12 May 2016 07:04:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [178.101.129.7] Received: by 10.28.15.68 with HTTP; Thu, 12 May 2016 07:04:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 15:04:03 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Pull Request From: Stian Soiland-Reyes To: dev@taverna.incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114a5dde75b6970532a5a10b archived-at: Thu, 12 May 2016 14:04:11 -0000 --001a114a5dde75b6970532a5a10b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Anyone with committer rights, e.g. who is listed on our /about page, should have git write access. Some projects practice a review-than-commit process, where a committer deliberately makes a pull request so it can be reviewed, it is then either merged by whoever reviews it, or If a plenary discussion shows everything is good, the committer merges his own commit. I hope Taverna don't need such a process, as we are a bit small! :-) So I think we practice "just do it" instead, commit what you have, and then let's see what breaks (..) ;) But it would still be appropriate for a big change to be reviewed, and a branch (perhaps on the asf repo so others can change it) followed by a pull request to form the discussion thread for the proposed change. Obviously for pull requests from non-committers we need to review them. I think we've just practised "first one wins", with GSOC contributions generally reviewed by the corresponding author. But I'm OK with anyone else reviewing and accepting my GSOC student's pull requests if they get there first! On 12 May 2016 2:43 p.m., "Gale Naylor" wrote: > A couple of questions regarding merging pull requests: Who is able to > merge? Is the pull request typically reviewed by someone other than the > author? I'll try to find a place to document this. Any suggestions? > > On Thu, May 12, 2016, 4:09 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes > wrote: > > > If you merge it normally or with --no-ff, then you usually don't need > > the magic "This closes #1" string, as GitHub detects it's the same > > commit ids. > > > > > > If you do a squash merge or similar, then you would need "This closes > #1". > > > > I think if we get code from outside, then it's good if we use merge > > --no-ff (this forces a merge commit), which commit message can have > > the "This closes #1" to be relate it to the pull request. > > > > That way we can also see in the git log which of the committers > > reviewed the patch and also track the link to the pull request. > > > > (You can always see who pushed it in the commit mailing list, e.g. > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/taverna-commits/201605.mbox/%3Cca9479fbd5ca4f13913fd072fb00f0d3%40git.apache.org%3E > > ) > > > > On 12 May 2016 at 11:31, Ian Dunlop wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I think it is git merge --no-ff gale-readme-updates -m "This closes #1" > > > Where gale-readme-updates is the local copy of the github pull request. > > > Seems to keep all the provenance from the pull request. I'll merge it > in, > > > you can shout later if you want ;) > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Ian > > > > > > On 12 May 2016 at 11:28, Ian Dunlop wrote: > > > > > >> Hello, > > >> > > >> I was going to merge this then I realised that I've forgotten how I > did > > it > > >> before! What is the best way to merge pull requests? Basically we want > > to > > >> keep the provenance while adding a "This closes #1" type message. I > > don't > > >> think we have anything on the site about how to do it. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> > > >> Ian > > >> > > >> On 11 May 2016 at 20:14, Ian Dunlop wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hello, > > >>> > > >>> We should get this merged before any release. Thanks Gale. > > >>> > > >>> Cheers, > > >>> > > >>> Ian > > >>> > > >>> On 11 May 2016 at 17:54, Gale Naylor > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> It looks like I still have an open pull request: > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-commandline/pull/1 > > >>>> > > >>>> Gale > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Stian Soiland-Reyes > > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) > > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 > > > --001a114a5dde75b6970532a5a10b--