Jake, would you be willing to join a Google Hangout session with Rod, Todd, I and anybody else who would like to join so we can work out a plan for the contribution workflow? Maybe sometime this week?
The email back-and-forth is not working well. I volunteer to write up the minutes of the meeting so we can reflect it back to the mailing list. - Dave On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Rod Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > We have to find a way to avoid this. It is completely inefficient and > simply doesn't make sense. Git repos are mirrors of one another - as long > as a synch occurs, where the commit happens is irrelevant. What matters is > that we vet the IP and ICLAs and then log everything to the ML. > > > > > > Rod > > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Jake Farrell<[email protected]>, wrote: > >> Hey Dave >> Completely agree with having the RTC process, its just where the commit >> is >> occurring. You can still submit all PR's against >> github.com/apache/incubator-usergrid and review and reject as necessary, >> the only difference is that there is no merge button available as its a >> read only mirror you are reviewing against. This would be no different >> than >> if you where using the Apache Reviewboard instance for project reviews. >> You >> would still review and comment on the code and when satisfied close the >> review and submit the code back to git-wip. >> >> -Jake >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Dave <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Thanks for the response. Comments in-line below. >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Jake Farrell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> You had the flow correct up till >> >> "Committer closes PR and does not merge (because the repo is >> >> read-only)" >> >> >> >> Since the committer is working of git-wip and it is the canonical >> source >> >> then when they commit the contribution and push it to git-wip there is >> no >> >> need to merge anywhere else as it will be mirrored to git.a.o and >> github >> >> will pick this change up and automatically close the pull request and >> >> comment on it for you. The main sticking point is the use of >> >> github.com/usergrid which is where the commit is actually occurring >> >> currently and it needs to occur on git-wip. Switching to using >> >> github.com/apache/incubator-usergrid for PR reviews/discussions will >> >> take care most of the concerns brought up (permissions, commit origin, >> >> mailing list notification). >> >> >> >> The accepted flow being used by most projects right now is as follows: >> >> >> >> - Contributor clones project from >> >> - github.com/apache/incubator-usergrid >> >> - Committer clones project from >> >> - git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-usergrid.git >> >> >> > >> > I believe that step is a problem. The Usergrid process that we voted in >> > uses GitHub as a code review system, every change made against the >> master >> > branch must be submitted as a PR in GitHub. That is where we examine >> the >> > code line-by-line, make comments on specific lines of code, etc. Our >> > process is Review Then Commit (RTC) for the master branch. >> > >> > >> >> - Contributor submits PR to project on >> >> github.com/apache/incubator-usergrid >> >> - Comments automatically echoed to project mailing list >> >> - Committer merges PR into a local clone of the ASF repo >> >> - I've scripted this process out for Mesos, happy to do the same here >> >> if needed >> >> >> > - Committer pushes change to ASF git repo at git-wip-us.apache.org >> >> - Comments or commit hash from the commit to git-wip close out the PR >> >> when github picks up the mirror from git.apache.org >> >> >> >> I'd like to see us switch to this workflow and then outline and work >> to >> >> improve the process for all projects where any limitations are seen. >> >> >> > >> > (I think our descriptions of the process are a little muddy because we >> are >> > mixing what a committer does vs. what a contributor who is not a >> committer >> > does.) >> > >> > How would you adjust your suggested process to ensure all changes >> against >> > master are done via GitHub PR? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > - Dave >> > >> > >> >
