On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 11:34 -0700, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Am 2017-05-29 um 22:54 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> >
> > > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
> > > philippe.moua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > > > I'm not committer still, my 2 cents:
> > > >
> > > > [x] +1 Committers must abide to these Git guidelines while
> > > > working on the
> > > > code
> > > >
> > > > Except for this one:
> > > > => 1. Request the release manager to merge your banch back to
> > > > the
> > > > release
> > > > branch and make sure that this merge won't incur a merge commit
> > > >
> > > > IMO, this creates a contention on release manager.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm not a fan of that one. That seems like:
> > >
> > > - a bottleneck for all waiting for the RM to merge.
> > > - an additional burden to the RM
> > >
> > > The text is in contradiction of itself IMO: While "Guidlines" is
> > > in the
> > > title, the boy includes "every committer must abide..." which is
> > > does not
> > > feel like a "guideline". As soon as you enter the "MUST"
> > > territory, do you
> > > need to define what happens if you do not "abide" by the "MUSTs"?
> > >
> > > If these are really guidelines, then all of this is the preferred
> > > way but
> > > all committers are allowed to diverge to get things done.
> > >
> >
> > Gary, why didn't you speak up earlier?
>
>
> Obviously, I was was busy.
>
>
> > I made serveral attempts for the points?
> >
> > We can rename it to Git Rules if you want, so this will be
> > mandatory for
> > all committers. Btw, you recommended to rename to Git Guidelines...
>
>
> Changing the title to "Guidelines" while keeping the intent of strict
> rules
> is misleading. My hope was that my point about using the term
> 'guidelines'
> would trickle down to the actual text, which was obvious to me, and I
> was
> clearly off by not stating my intentions more clearly. I do not
> believe
> that more process and stricter rules will benefit this project,
> especially
> by creating a bottleneck around the RM. But hey, that's just me.
> Since you
> have done (AFAICT) and are currently are doing the bulk of the heavy
> lifting, I am willing to working within your worldview. Sure, I'd
> like to
> see my contributions flow (pun intended) more fluidly (I'm on fire
> today)
> into the code base, but I am happy to live within the confines this
> our
> community defines.
>
> Gary
>
Gary, Michael, et al
What if we relax this statement a little by saying that 'a committer
prepares a dev branch, asks RM for a review, and if RM fails to respond
or merge the branch within a, say, 48h window, merges the dev branch
to release branches'?
We also say that committers should follow these guidelines to avoid
conflicts instead of abiding them as strict rules?
Those guidelines that should be strict can be expressed as 'MUST avoid
merge commit', and so on.
Oleg
PS: this is why I prefer writing code.
>
>
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.or
> > g>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Am 2017-05-24 um 19:11 schrieb Michael Osipov:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am re-casting this vote for the previously discussed Git
> > > > > > guidelines
> > > > > > for all committers to make life easier for everyone. If the
> > > > > > vote
> > > > > > passes,
> > > > > > every committer must abide to this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The guidelines:
> > > > > > = Typical Issue Workflow =
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Branch off a release branch (e.g., 4.4.x, 5.0.x)
> > > > > > ({{{git checkout
> > > > > > -b
> > > > > > <release branch>/<JIRA id> master}}}) where {{{<JIRA id>}}}
> > > > > > being the
> > > > > > JIRA issue you have assigned to yourself, e.g., HTTPCORE-
> > > > > > 123 or
> > > > > > HTTPCLIENT-689. Exmaple: {{{git checkout -b 4.4.x/HTTPCORE-
> > > > > > 123
> > > > > > 4.4.x}}}.
> > > > > > 1. Work on your issue and create as many commits as you
> > > > > > want/need
> > > > > > 1. Polish it, squash it or fix it up into a single commit
> > > > > > 1. Ask for a review if you are uncertain
> > > > > > 1. Take care of a proper commit message (good reads:
> > > > > > [[https://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/|1]] and
> > > > > > [[https://github.com/erlang/otp/wiki/Writing-good-commit-me
> > > > > > ssages|2]]
> > > > > > ):
> > > > > > Put the title of the JIRA issue, e.g., [HTTPCORE-123]
> > > > > > Memory leak in
> > > > > > response, in the first line, followed by an explanation why
> > > > > > you did
> > > > > > take
> > > > > > this approach. The ticket desc contains the issue, your
> > > > > > commit message
> > > > > > contains the solution. If in doubt, ask for help and give
> > > > > > people a
> > > > > > couple of days to react.
> > > > > > 1. Request the release manager to merge your banch back to
> > > > > > the release
> > > > > > branch and make sure that this merge won't incur a merge
> > > > > > commit
> > > > > > 1. When you close the issue, put a link to your commit to
> > > > > > create a
> > > > > > direct relation between issue and solution.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > = Side Notes =
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Never rewrite (rebase) history on master or any other
> > > > > > long-lived
> > > > > > branch because you will break others. Only the release
> > > > > > manager is
> > > > > > entitled to clean up history upto 72 hours after a commit
> > > > > > if it is
> > > > > > absolutely necessary
> > > > > > 1. If a change comes for a PR on GitHub:
> > > > > > * Apply the same above rules
> > > > > > * Don't steal authorship
> > > > > > * Let the reporter polish his work
> > > > > > * Amend the message at the end with "This closes/fixes
> > > > > > #xy" and
> > > > > > push.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Link: https://wiki.apache.org/HttpComponents/GitGuidelines
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vote is open until 2017-05-29 00:00 Etc/UTC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > vote is over and no one except Oleg and me has voted.
> > > > >
> > > > > What now? Will chaos reign our Git repos?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > ----------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cordialement.
> > > > Philippe Mouawad.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org
