All, I've taken the input from Mark and applied it to the changes.
Please review at your convenience. Assuming we're still settled on the change, I can push this week. (e.g. since most people already voted +1 I'd like to get a nod from Mark that he's good with the changes). John On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:37 AM John D. Ament <[email protected]> wrote: > Mark, > > Good points. > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 4:54 AM Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> We should add a section that the person who applies the PR to our >> canonical repo have to verify that the PR only contains commits from the >> contributor himself. He basically needs to make sure that the contributor >> doesn't ship too much in the pull request (and thus trashing our code >> provenance chain). >> > > This note should be added to both PR and Patch sections IMHO. Same issue > could exist for patches. > > >> >> ASF committers should not use PRs but directly commit to canonical repo >> themselves. >> Of course it's fine to showcase ideas etc on github first. But you can >> simply cherry pick that over to master and push that to our repo yourself. >> > > To me this is described in the "discussion" workflow, but I can call it > out a bit clearer. Same should be true of patches though. This would also > be for DS committers, not necessarily ASF committers (e.g. may be a > committer on other projects, just not DS, then a PR should be fine as well > as a patch). > > >> >> just my .02 >> >> txs and LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Tuesday, 26 July 2016, 1:26, Jason Porter <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > +1 PRs are much easier to work with, imo. >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Christian Kaltepoth < >> [email protected] >> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Hey John, >> >> >> >> Great work! >> >> >> >> +1 ;) >> >> >> >> Christian >> >> >> >> 2016-07-23 18:14 GMT+02:00 Daniel Cunha <[email protected]>: >> >> >> >> > Hi John, >> >> > >> >> > Greate job. I think that we really need to have that. It's much >> > more easy >> >> > and cool to work with PR. >> >> > Easy way to review, easy way to fix changes, the contributor does >> not >> >> need >> >> > to attach a new patch just need to update the PR and we'll have >> > feedbacks >> >> > more fast with PR Builder Plugin and comments by line on PR. >> >> > >> >> > I prefer this way, totally agree with your PR. >> >> > >> >> > +1 :) >> >> > >> >> > On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 1:04 PM, John D. Ament >> > <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > All, >> >> > > >> >> > > I put together a first pass PR on an improved contributor >> > workflow that >> >> > can >> >> > > leverage github PRs. This is in addition to our existing patch >> >> approach. >> >> > > >> >> > > You can find the PR here, with the changes: >> >> > > https://github.com/apache/deltaspike/pull/61/files >> >> > > >> >> > > Using PRs gives us a bit of an advantage: >> >> > > >> >> > > - We don't lose the original author in the commit >> >> > > - We can run automated tests prior to the commit being merged in >> >> > > >> >> > > Please take a look, I'm happy to adjust as needed. I also >> > took the >> >> > liberty >> >> > > to replace some of the to-be-retired links (e.g. people.a.o is >> > retiring >> >> > > soon, mail archives are being moved to pony, ICLA is now PDF >> > based) >> >> > > >> >> > > John >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Daniel Cunha >> >> > https://twitter.com/dvlc_ >> >> > http://www.tomitribe.com >> >> > http://www.tomitribe.io >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Christian Kaltepoth >> >> Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/ >> >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal >> >> GitHub: https://github.com/chkal >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Jason Porter >> > http://en.gravatar.com/lightguardjp >> > >> >
