zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Justin Ling Mao" <maoling199210...@sina.com>
Subject Re: Re: Question on ZK commit/patch policy.
Date Tue, 05 Mar 2019 09:16:28 GMT
agree with this from Brian Nixon.--->"For trivial changes like spelling, whitespace, pruning
of import, does itmake sense to have one super/umbrella ticket with multiple PRs attached"
----- Original Message -----From: Brian Nixon <brian.nixon.cs@gmail.com>
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question on ZK commit/patch policy.
Date: 2019-03-05 05:54

I like having JIRAs for all changes because it allows one to track all the
changes to given components through the JIRA web interface and it forces
the contributor to spend some time upfront making sure their change is a
single coherent unit.
For trivial changes like spelling, whitespace, pruning of import, does it
make sense to have one super/umbrella ticket with multiple PRs attached?
-Brian
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:04 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that having a JIRA makes it simpler to create release notes and
> track bugfixes/new features.
> Trivial changes, like typos are not worth a JIRA.
>
> My 2 cents
> Enrico
>
> Il mer 27 feb 2019, 17:57 Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> ha scritto:
>
> > Yea, the commit I just did was a single missing space so no big deal.
> > Jordan's link is to curator current policy which seems very similar to
> > ours.
> >
> > I know what current state is. My question though is what do people think?
> > Stay with the current mechanism or move to something else? Staying put is
> > fine, I just wanted to review given it's been a while (10+ years!) since
> we
> > last considered this and with github/gitbox and time baselines have
> changed
> > considerably over that time.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 8:44 AM Andor Molnar <andor@cloudera.com.invalid
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > There were a few typo/language/cosmetic related patches which were so
> > small
> > > that we've decided it's probably not worth the effort to create a Jira
> > for
> > > every one of them.
> > > Similarly, I haven't created Jiras for issues that were found in
> release
> > > candidates.
> > >
> > > Other than this we generally still don't accept patches without Jira
> > ticket
> > > and properly formatted title / commit message.
> > >
> > > Andor
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 5:38 PM Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Historically we've only committed changes that have an associated
> JIRA.
> > > Now
> > > > with the move to gitbox we are seeing increased submissions (PRs)
> that
> > > > don't include a JIRA - I just committed one and then realized that it
> > > > didn't include a JIRA (sorry about that!). Given github and the
> recent
> > > move
> > > > to gitbox significantly streamlines the contribution process I'm
> > > wondering
> > > > if we should reconsider our process. Any thoughts? Anyone work on
> > another
> > > > Apache project that does things differently and has pro/con to share?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Patrick
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message