+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 <nkal...@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 <nkal...@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 <nkal...@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 < > maoling199210...@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 <nkal...@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 > >>> > >> >
