Hi all, Guozhang raised this topic in the "[DISCUSS] Using GitHub Pull Requests for contributions and code review" thread and suggested starting a new thread for it.
In the Spark project, they say: "If the change is new, then it usually needs a new JIRA. However, trivial changes, where "what should change" is virtually the same as "how it should change" do not require a JIRA. Example: "Fix typos in Foo scaladoc"." In such cases, the commit message would be prefixed with [MINOR] or [HOTFIX] instead of [KAFKA-xxx]. I can see the pros and cons for each approach. Always requiring a JIRA ticket makes it more consistent and makes it possible to use JIRA as the place to prioritise what needs attention (although this is imperfect as code review will take place in the pull request and it's likely that JIRA won't always be fully in sync for in-progress items). Skipping JIRA tickets for minor/hotfix pull requests (where the JIRA ticket just duplicates the information in the pull request) eliminates redundant work and reduces the barrier to contribution (it is likely that people will occasionally submit PRs without a JIRA even when the change is too big for that though). Guozhang suggested in the original thread: "Personally I think it is better to not enforcing a JIRA ticket for minor / hotfix commits, for example, we can format the title with [MINOR] [HOTFIX] etc as in Spark" What do others think? Best, Ismael
