Till, yeah. My original email was my knee-jerk. And I knew it sounded awful as I was writing it. (See the end of the email for the admission of that.) I think pulling in the comments *from* Github is the way forward here. I see Jan is pursing this with Infra at the moment. Thanks Jan! And thanks folks for putting up with my thinking-out-loud.
On 15 March 2013 12:41, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Mar 15, 2013, at 13:36 , till <klimp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think requiring the mailing list is counter intuitive. I know what the > rules and regulations are, but it's often an advantage when comments and > discussion happen where the related code is. Everything else (e.g. > copy/pasting URL references in an additional email to satisfy maybe > slightly out-dated rules and regulations) is too much work. ;-) > > > > Maybe I can try to help bridging comments to this mailing list if wanted. > > yeah, what we need/want is a script that not only notifies this list of > created and closed pull requests, but also the comments made on them. IIRC > I chatted with Paul Davis about this at ApacheCon EU and I don’t recall > anything blocking this except extending the script that does the current > email notifications to do more. Paul can correct me. > > I’m major +1 on making Pull Requests a first class citizen on this list. > > Cheers > Jan > -- > > > > > > Till > > > > On Friday, March 15, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > > > >> It's a minor point, and probably not worth me sending another email, > but I > >> guess the framing in my original email was wrong. It's not that we > >> shouldn't be having discussions on PRs, or that activity shouldn't be > >> happening on Github. That's not the problem, and I retract the parts > where > >> I imply that it is. :) The problem is that activity should be visible on > >> the dev list. That's what we need to solve. My statements jumped the > gun a > >> little bit about what sort of solution was required. ;) Heh. > >> > >> > >> On 15 March 2013 12:16, Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org (mailto: > nsla...@apache.org)> wrote: > >> > >>> Hey folks, > >>> > >>> I'd like to bring two things to your attention: > >>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/43 > >>> https://github.com/cloudant-labs/couchdb/pull/18 > >>> > >>> These just happen to be two pull requests I looked at today, there are > >>> more. > >>> > >>> On the one hand, this is great. Obviously. Any sort of constructive > >>> activity happening around CouchDB is great. > >>> > >>> But on the other hand, this discussion is core development discussion, > and > >>> should be happening on the dev list where everybody can see it. > >>> > >>> (This is foundational stuff for an Apache project. Community building > >>> should be focused around the mailing lists. I get that Github is > useful for > >>> people, but we're not a Github project, so our activity should not be > >>> happening there.) > >>> > >>> I don't know what to suggest. Obviously, I think pull requests are > great. > >>> And I think the forking model of Github is great, because it allows > people > >>> to contribute more easily, and in a manner that suits them. > >>> > >>> But on the other hand, we shouldn't be having important development > >>> discussions in pull requests. The PR isn't even against the Apache > CouchDB > >>> mirror. It's against a Cloudant fork! (So even less likely that folks > are > >>> going to see it.) > >>> > >>> Perhaps one of the policies we could document is that discussion of > pull > >>> requests must be brought to the list. > >>> > >>> That is, if a PR comes in to the Apache Github mirror, then we make a > >>> polite comment on the PR that points them to the mailing list thread > and > >>> asks them to participate in that forum, so the maximum amount of devs > can > >>> see and contribute. > >>> > >>> We could also say that if you have a fork of CouchDB, and you're > planning > >>> to contribute the work back to Apache CouchDB (as is the case with the > >>> Cloudant fork) that you do the same with any PRs that are made to your > >>> repos. > >>> > >>> A sample template comment could be as follows: > >>> > >>> == > >>> > >>> Thank you for the pull request! > >>> > >>> This is a mirror of the Apache CouchDB project, so many of the > committers > >>> do not monitor it for comments. Instead of discussing this pull request > >>> here, I have started a thread on the [developer mailing list] and I > invite > >>> you to participate! > >>> > >>> [LINK TO MAILING LIST THREAD] > >>> > >>> == > >>> > >>> Additionally, the mailing list thread, or the first reply to it, > should CC > >>> the original author. > >>> > >>> One alternative to this (which is a bit of a mess, I know) is to write > >>> an integration that copies Github comments to the mailing list thread, > and > >>> mailing list posts to the PR. Not sure that would work with forks of > the > >>> main mirror, however. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? Flames? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >>> -- > >>> NS > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> NS > > > > > > > > -- NS
