zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Han <h...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Suggestion] Use Co-authored-by in commit messages
Date Thu, 09 May 2019 04:44:40 GMT
>> My proposal is to use github's feature of Co-author
+1. The commit script would have to be updated to incorporate this feature.

>> if someone participate in the review of PR, no matter whether he/she is
a committer, we all need include his/her name
We already do this when commit a change so reviewers get credits as well
and we can keep it this way unless there is a better approach.


On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 11:23 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, it is a good idea to have a common practice for tracking the original
> author.
>
> IMHO this is up to the person who is picking up an old patch, it is his own
> responsibility.
>
> IIRC In Bookkeeper we keep the original author of the patch if the patch is
> a straight port from another private company fork with minimal changes.
>
> Having a Co-author is good from my side. I am not sure we can force it
>
> My 2cents
>
> Enrico
>
> Il mer 8 mag 2019, 19:31 Brian Nixon <brian.nixon.cs@gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
>
> > +1 to the idea of multiple authors, particularly for rescued code
> >
> > -1 to including all reviewers in the commit proper, this information is
> > easily enough found from poking at the mail archive where "original
> author"
> > requires studying a ticket on jira
> >
> > awesome idea!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 6:32 AM Norbert Kalmar
> <nkalmar@cloudera.com.invalid
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry everyone for the multiple emails...
> > > So, I get your suggestion now Maoling, sorry for the confusion.
> > > We already indicate the reviewer if it's from an apache email, as it
> > looks
> > > to me. (Doesn't have to be ZooKeeper committer). We should add external
> > > emails as well.
> > >
> > > So I just clarified this with Andor, looks like this is a manual entry
> > (the
> > > names/emails itself) during the commit (script).
> > >
> > > Let's hear what others think :)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Norbert Kalmar <nkalmar@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Well, HBase does it for example, commits have a "Signed-off-by: ..."
> > > line.
> > > >
> > > > All right, votes on for co-author and signed-off-by :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 2:58 PM Norbert Kalmar <nkalmar@cloudera.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Thanks Maoling, I also think encouraging code review as well is a
> good
> > > >> idea, but, unfortunately I have a "but" :)
> > > >> I see two issues with including reviewers in the commit message.
> > > >> First, I don't think there is a method to automate this, although
I
> > > think
> > > >> the commit script the committers are using can be modified to
> include
> > > it.
> > > >> Otherwise doing manually would complicate merging PRs for
> committers.
> > > >> My other, bigger issue is that there is nothing to track this
> > > >> information. At least I am not aware of anything. What I mean is
> > Github
> > > >> tracks authors of the commits. But what would we use the reviewers
> > > >> information? If you just want to check reviewers for whatever
> reason,
> > > there
> > > >> is a filter for that already on github, in the Pull Request view.
> And
> > > this
> > > >> would also make the commit message more "bloated".
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm not saying we shouldn't do this (not a -1 from my side), I just
> > have
> > > >> my concerns mentioned above.
> > > >>
> > > >> Is there any Apache project doing this? Just out of curiosity.
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >> Norbert
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 2:34 PM Justin Ling Mao <
> > > maoling199210191@sina.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> +1,A very good Suggestion.Thanks Norbert.I also suggest about
the
> > > >>> sign-off of the Reviewers' name.For the incentive, if someone
> > > participate
> > > >>> in the review of PR, no matter whether he/she is a committer,
we
> all
> > > need
> > > >>> include his/her name?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > > >>> From: Norbert Kalmar <nkalmar@cloudera.com.INVALID>
> > > >>> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> > > >>> Subject: [Suggestion] Use Co-authored-by in commit messages
> > > >>> Date: 2019-05-08 17:36
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hi Devs,
> > > >>> I've got this idea from HBase.
> > > >>> So: when there is a patch that is abandoned by its original author
> > for
> > > >>> any
> > > >>> reason, and it can no longer be merged, someone comes by, and
asks
> to
> > > >>> continue to work on it. Usually the reply is to use the change
> freely
> > > or
> > > >>> no
> > > >>> reply at all. Either way, what people end up doing is a new pull
> > > request,
> > > >>> and (correct me if I'm wrong) we do not have a standardized method
> > how
> > > to
> > > >>> indicate, or even to indicate at all the original author.
> > > >>> My proposal is to use github's feature of Co-author, which is
a way
> > of
> > > >>> attributing multiple authors of a given commit. See more details
> > here:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://help.github.com/en/articles/creating-a-commit-with-multiple-authors
> > > >>> I wouldn't think this needs to be forced or anything on future
PRs,
> > but
> > > >>> it's a nice thing to have. And if someone sees an old patch, this
> > could
> > > >>> give more incentive to continue to work on it, knowing there's
a
> > > >>> guideline
> > > >>> in the HowToContribute guide to credit him/her.
> > > >>> I can update the guide at
> > > >>>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute
> > > if
> > > >>> the reception is positive.
> > > >>> Regards,
> > > >>> Norbert
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

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