[Gluster-infra] [Bug 1428032] Update WorkerAnt to post to a github issue as soon as a patch is posted against the same

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1428032

Nigel Babu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed||2017-05-20 23:46:07



--- Comment #5 from Nigel Babu  ---
This merged and in production:
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs-patch-acceptance-tests/commit/1119585b253a5c40e0961bc96892ffab5c87c8f9

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nWFncIkvpD=cc_unsubscribe
___
Gluster-infra mailing list
Gluster-infra@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-infra

[Gluster-infra] [Bug 1428032] Update WorkerAnt to post to a github issue as soon as a patch is posted against the same

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1428032



--- Comment #4 from Shyamsundar  ---
(In reply to Nigel Babu from comment #1)
> glusterfs/glusterfs-specs are the only repos that will have any work done.

Yes, agreed, glusterdocs is not via gerrit, and github will take care of the
mention for us.

> The problem here is to remove duplication. We currently push to bugzilla
> every time a patchset is created.

For features there will be no bug in the commit message, it will be of the rfc
type, so if I read your comment here right, WorkerAnt will automagically hence
post to Bugzilla or to github only and not to both, right? So the duplication
problem does not exist? (or are you referring to the duplication issue as
discussed in the next para by you, in which case, disregard this comment)

> 
> For a large change, there may be multiple pushes that will create noise if
> we add comment on every patchset. This needs to be fixed for Bugzilla *as
> well*. Once that's sorted, we'll make the change for Github.

Sigh! yes this is true and to some extent I agree that it is noise as well
(hence the sigh).

At the same time this repetitive posting also (sometimes) helps (maybe), that
there is a new change that you may want to look at when following the bug (or
in this case the issue).

> 
> Does this sound acceptable?

I would like to treat the noise and posting to github issues separately, as I
would like the github issue posting to appear sooner, but that assumes I know
how much effort it would take to do both. Does this answer your question on
acceptability.

I will also send in a mail with the various requests that have been made of the
infra team with some form of priority to them, just so we are on the same page.

(apologies if this is causing confusion at present)

> 
> glusterdocs is handled entirely in Github. If you mention an issue in the
> pull request, it will do the linking already.

Yes, agreed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FXeQrUwkWw=cc_unsubscribe
___
Gluster-infra mailing list
Gluster-infra@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-infra

[Gluster-infra] [Bug 1428032] Update WorkerAnt to post to a github issue as soon as a patch is posted against the same

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1428032



--- Comment #3 from Niels de Vos  ---
Sorry, that last comment was meant to be posted in bug 1428034.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ycUXEfHNMZ=cc_unsubscribe
___
Gluster-infra mailing list
Gluster-infra@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-infra

[Gluster-infra] [Bug 1428032] Update WorkerAnt to post to a github issue as soon as a patch is posted against the same

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1428032

Niels de Vos  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nde...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Niels de Vos  ---
Because we now get into a mix of numbers pointing to either Bugzilla or GitHub,
I suggest to have the "BUG: 012345" replaced by URLs. The same approach needs
to be done for GitHub issues. For someone reading the commit messages, a single
well known source for bug reports and RFEs is easy, when we have two it will
become confusing for many.

If replacing the "BUG: .." is tricky, it may be easier to add a "Reported-on:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1428032; and "Reported-on:
https://github.com/;. matching the existing scheme for "Reviewed-on:".

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ODplZjZjGD=cc_unsubscribe
___
Gluster-infra mailing list
Gluster-infra@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-infra

[Gluster-infra] [Bug 1428032] Update WorkerAnt to post to a github issue as soon as a patch is posted against the same

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1428032

Nigel Babu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #1 from Nigel Babu  ---
glusterfs/glusterfs-specs are the only repos that will have any work done. The
problem here is to remove duplication. We currently push to bugzilla every time
a patchset is created.

For a large change, there may be multiple pushes that will create noise if we
add comment on every patchset. This needs to be fixed for Bugzilla *as well*.
Once that's sorted, we'll make the change for Github.

Does this sound acceptable?

glusterdocs is handled entirely in Github. If you mention an issue in the pull
request, it will do the linking already.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Uq3IfakwP7=cc_unsubscribe
___
Gluster-infra mailing list
Gluster-infra@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-infra