To Fokko's point: > 2. We need to make sure that we close the Jira ourself.
Do we have a preference between the issue being closed by the PR sender vs the PR merger? I had one merged today but didn't want to disrupt the process if someone is already working on getting Jira issue closing automated again, etc. Taylor On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 5:14 AM, Sergei Iakhnin <lle...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for addressing this quickly Ash! > > On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:06 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor < > ash_airflowl...@firemirror.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 1 Aug 2018, at 09:43, Ash Berlin-Taylor < > > ash_airflowl...@firemirror.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Sergi, > > > > > > Yes, I agree, and I've asked (as a short term measure) for the comments > > to list and comments on every PR duplicating to Jira to be removed (so > that > > the volume was as it was) -- we can then think about what we want to > > re-enable, perhaps to a different list. > > > > > > > I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16854 to ask > them > > to remove the comment integration so the volume of mails should drop once > > they get around to it. I don't know how long that will take. > > > > Sorry about the noise - I didn't know Gitbox would integrate comments > like > > this as nothing I read about the process mentioned this. > > > > -ash > > > > > Fokko: the new Apache-hosted URL is > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-airflow.git > > > > > > We should ask if they can remove/hide the old non-gitbox one. > > > > > > -ash > > > > > >> On 1 Aug 2018, at 08:35, Sergei Iakhnin <lle...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> I find the dev list has gotten extremely noisy with the move to > Github. > > >> Getting an email about every PR comment seems a bit excessive. Might > it > > be > > >> a good idea to not have this list subscribed to all the github > updates? > > >> People who are interested in such granular updates can still "watch" > the > > >> github repo to opt in. > > >> > > >> With best regards, > > >> > > >> Sergei. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:30 AM Driesprong, Fokko <fo...@driesprong.frl > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Max, > > >>> > > >>> We're totally on the same page, I think I've phrased it a bit clumsy. > > >>> > > >>> Two things that I've noticed: > > >>> > > >>> 1. Apache is not being mirrored, is this expected behaviour? > > >>> > > >>> MacBook-Pro-van-Fokko:incubator-airflow fokkodriesprong$ git reset > > --hard > > >>> apache/master > > >>> > > >>> HEAD is now at dfa7b26d [AIRFLOW-2809] Fix security issue regarding > > Flask > > >>> SECRET_KEY > > >>> > > >>> MacBook-Pro-van-Fokko:incubator-airflow fokkodriesprong$ git reset > > --hard > > >>> github/master > > >>> > > >>> HEAD is now at ed972042 [AIRFLOW-1104] Update jobs.py so Airflow does > > not > > >>> over schedule tasks (#3568) > > >>> > > >>> 2. We need to make sure that we close the Jira ourself. > > >>> > > >>> Cheers, Fokko > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> 2018-07-31 21:50 GMT+02:00 Maxime Beauchemin < > > maximebeauche...@gmail.com>: > > >>> > > >>>> What I meant by changing history is mutating one or many SHAs in the > > >>>> branch, an operation that would require force-pushing, which merging > > >>>> doesn't do. Personally I prefer "Squash & Merge" as it makes for a > > >>>> merge-commit free `git log` and having a linear branch history in > > master > > >>>> that aligns with when things were introduced to the branch. > > >>>> > > >>>> It's possible to disable some of these options from the repo (only > if > > >>>> you're an Admin, meaning we'd have to involve INFRA to change that). > > But > > >>>> it's good to have options for the cases I mentioned above. > > >>>> > > >>>> So committers, use "Squash and Merge"! It matches our previous > process > > >>> when > > >>>> using the defaults in the now defunct `scripts/airflow-pr` > > >>>> > > >>>> [I'm really hoping I'm not starting a merge vs rebase workflow > debate > > >>>> here...] > > >>>> > > >>>> Max > > >>>> > > >>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 12:37 PM Driesprong, Fokko > > <fo...@driesprong.frl > > >>>> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi Max, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> You're right. I just started plowing though my mailbox and merged a > > >>>> commit > > >>>>> without squash and merge, but it changes history as you mention. > > >>>>> Nice thing of Github is if you change it, it remembers your > > preference > > >>>>> which is Squash and Merge :-) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Love the Gitbox so far, great work! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Cheers, Fokko > > >>>>> > > >>>>> 2018-07-31 21:34 GMT+02:00 Maxime Beauchemin < > > >>> maximebeauche...@gmail.com > > >>>>> : > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> "Squash & Merge" (the default) does the right thing (squashes the > > >>>>> multiple > > >>>>>> commit and replays the resulting commit on top of master), we > should > > >>>> use > > >>>>>> that most of the times. We'd only want to merge if we wanted to > > >>>> preserve > > >>>>>> history from within the PR (multiple collaborators or multiple > > >>>> important > > >>>>>> commits that we want to keep detailed in master for instance). > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I'm not sure how to verify whether the `master` branch is > protected > > >>> on > > >>>>> this > > >>>>>> setup (without pushing to it as a test, which I'd rather not do). > We > > >>>>> should > > >>>>>> make sure that it is though as changing history on master can > cause > > >>> all > > >>>>>> sorts of problems. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Max > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:21 AM Sid Anand <san...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The other benefit of using Option 3 over Option 1 is that you > > >>>> maintain > > >>>>>> the > > >>>>>>> history of who committed and who authored in one line in the Git > > >>>> log-- > > >>>>>> i.e. > > >>>>>>> "bob33 authored and ashb committed 3 hours ago" instead of just > > >>> "ashb > > >>>>>>> committed" for a merge commit followed by the commit(s) from > bob33. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:11 AM Sid Anand <san...@apache.org> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Ash, > > >>>>>>>> This is pretty cool. I just merged one PR from GH directly. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Interestingly, I still used the `dev/airflow-pr work_local` to > > >>> test > > >>>>> out > > >>>>>>>> the PR, but merging directly in the GitHub UI afterwards > > >>> definitely > > >>>>>>> avoided > > >>>>>>>> my needing to do another `dev/airflow-pr merge` CLI command. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> There are 3 options in the UI: The default is "Create a merge > > >>>> commit" > > >>>>>>>> (Option 1). I think the ones we want is the "Rebase & Merge" > > >>>> (Option > > >>>>>> 3), > > >>>>>>>> which requires that PR submitters squash their commits. > > >>> Otherwise, > > >>>> we > > >>>>>>> could > > >>>>>>>> use "Squash & Merge" (Option 2), though I am not clear if Squash > > >>> & > > >>>>>> Merge > > >>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>> more like option 1 or option 3. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -s > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:19 PM Andrew Phillips < > > >>>>> aphill...@qrmedia.com > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> We should ask Apache infra to send the GH notifs to another > > >>>>> mailing > > >>>>>>>>>> list. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Over at jclouds, we created a "notifications@" list for this > > >>>>> purpose > > >>>>>>>>> (well, actually we renamed "issues@" to "notifications@"), and > > >>>> send > > >>>>>>>>> messages there: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-7180 > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jclouds-notifications/ > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Regards > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> ap > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> Sergei > > > > > > > -- > > Sergei >
