Thanks Wei-Chiu for starting this discussion. +1 (non-binding) for turning code review to GitHub PR and keep other comments/discussions on JIRA.
1. In my experience, JIRA is better at tracking and recording information. 2. It is confused that no guide (`How to contribute`) about submit PR to JIRA or GitHub, so there are a few patches and review comments active at both side. In my opinion it is necessary to unify them. Thanks, He Xiaoqiao On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 6:01 PM Gabor Bota <gabor.b...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: > Although we will use github with PRs, I'd still prefer adding a +1 as a > jira comment stating which PR was the last and approved one among the many. > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:22 AM Steve Loughran > <ste...@cloudera.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Eric Badger > > <ebad...@verizonmedia.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > Where would JIRA fit into the PR workflow? Would we file JIRAs just to > > > track github PRs and have all of the discussion on the PR? > > > > > > > > Every code contribution needs its JIRA for: tracking, release notes, > cross > > referencing; every committed patch needs that JIRA reference. > > > > Reviews of specific patches go into the PRs > > > > I actually think discussion about overall direction of work is better in > > the JIRA, because a complex piece of work can have multiple PRs: > different > > attempts where when you need to rebase its best to create a new one so > the > > old discussion is still linked to specific lines of code, and when > > different people take a PR and contribute their own work. > > > > That split of comments across >1 PR is one of the costs of using github > for > > review. > > >
