@yiheng
It could be better we list several title format and start a voting thread
to see which one wins. For me these formats doesn't beat one from another,
but we should stick to a standard format.
A new thread such as
[VOTE] Commit title format
option1: ...
option2: ...
works for me. And of
Thanks for your replies!
I agree with Justin that it's better that we work out the best way for the
project and community while looking at what other projects do.
@Saisai the thread seems focus on the title format of a pull request.
Please narrow the scope of discussion. Also per @Junping 's
Hi,
While it's good to look at what other projects do, please remember:
- They are top level projects and they may do things in a way for their own
particular reasons
- They may not be aware of recent changes in policy
- What works for one project may not be be the best for another project or
Thanks for bringing up discussions here, Yiheng!
I think we need to discuss the whole workflow with more details (could be
separated thread), such as "how to contribute", "how to commit". Without
consensus and documented, it would be all messed up.
Thanks,
Junping
Saisai Shao 于2020年1月8日周三
I agreed, I think there should a wiki about "how to contribute".
Also about the commit log, I think we should use the script to formalize
the commit log and use this to merge, not directly using GH button, one
consideration is to formalize the commit log, another is to avoid
additional merge
Hi Yiheng,
I agree that it helps we standardize the commit title. Actually the
ZooKeeper community
use
ZOOKEEPER-XXX: (optional components) PR description
And thus I use
TUBEMQ-7: Using StringBuilder instead of StringBuffer in BaseResult
I'm ok with your proposal but what's important IMO is
I would prefer [TUBEMQ-][Component] PR description according to experiences
in spark and parquet projects.
-邮件原件-
发件人: Yiheng Wang [mailto:yihe...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2020年1月8日 11:38
收件人: dev@tubemq.apache.org
抄送: 奕恒 王
主题: PR title format(Internet mail)
Hi community
I've noticed
Hi community
I've noticed that PR titles are little causal. For example:
- optimization for delete unnecessary code
- TUBEMQ-7: Using StringBuilder instead of StringBuffer in BaseResult
Should we consider follow common Apache project pattern, like:
[TUBEMQ-XXX] PR description
or
