On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 2:00 AM Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 19:10, Matthias Kuhn <matth...@opengis.ch> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Thanks for the continued effort in reviewing. It's one of the > not-so-visible-highly-technically-and-socially-qualified-people-needed-but-very-important > aspects of (open source) software development. > > > > I try to go over the PR queue every now and then and > merge/comment/review what's possible, but these days I find less time than > in the past. While at the same time it seems pull request activity > increases it seems. > > I'll make sure we raise this topic at an upcoming OPENGIS.ch meeting and > encourage people to participate. > > > > Additionally to what has been said already, backports are easy to forget > / ignore by the original author because they have been opened by a bot and > as an author you won't receive notifications by reviewers or the stale bot. > I wonder if we could get the original author more involved if we'd mention > them in the backport comment and increase their responsibility for this > part. This might be worth some automation. > > I definitely think this would help. The mentality at the moment is > predominantly that "as soon as the original PR is merged, the > responsibility is no longer mine" and that "someone else" will handle > the backports. In part this is due to how easy the bot has made > backporting.. we've now all got the mentality that the bot will handle > everything for us, but that's not the case in reality. I think > tweaking the backport message so that the author is mentioned will > help here, as at least they'll get notified if we close the backport > due to merge conflicts/etc. I'd also love to see the bot fixed so that > commits are cherry-picked and the ORIGINAL author name is attributed > to the commit. I think this is very important for accountability... > currently all the backport commits are anonymous and attributed to the > bot only, which makes it hard to tell who is responsible for the > change. I wish we could keep the original author here, as I think this > helps increase burden of responsiblity for that author... A poor > quality or buggy backport will directly reflect on their reputation, > so they are more likely to self-police backport PRs and ensure they > are suitable for merge. (At least, I hope so). > Points addressed in an update to the backport bot. Merge commits are "unpacked", responsibility given to the original author. (Rebase merges still not supported). I'm not super confident about everything I did here, if the backport bot behaves weird in the next few days, please let me know. > > The other really painful thing with backport bot is that we have to > manually close and reopen ALL automated backports in order for the > tests to run. It's a minor thing, but definitely contributes to the > "chore" and drudgery of maintaining the PR list. Especially because > only a few have permission to do this, and unless the original > contributor has merge rights they can't even close/open their own > backports to help speed things along. > Not sure what's happening, any idea why? > > Don't get me wrong - backport bot *is* great, and has simplified work > a lot. But with a bit more investment and refinement it could be > incredible and save me substantially more time! > > > Something else is that for example for me, the process to decide which > backports get into pending backports was not obvious at first (only the LTR > or also LR? At which stage of the LTR? How exactly do they get in there?), > I'm sure for other people there are other parts of the process that are not > immediately clear. I think documenting the review process could help here > (the suggestions written by Nyall above for a lower entry barrier into the > reviewer process would already be worth mentioning). > > Right, we should definitely document this better. I'd suggest you and > I get together sometime to do this, as we've been appointed this > responsibility by PSC already. Can you ping me off list so we can > arrange this? > Done Matthias
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer