phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Taylor <jamestay...@apache.org>
Subject Re: best development methodology for Apache git?
Date Fri, 31 Jan 2014 01:03:28 GMT
In what format is the patch given to you? Is it (or can it be) a git-diff?
And how do you visually apply the patch so that you can see it in the
context of the code (when you're evaluating it)?

Our source-of-truth and record-of-what-happened is the Apache git repo. It
would be nice if we could associate the committed SHAs with the JIRA
(ideally in some automated way).

Using review board sounds promising if it can be driven off of the git-diff.

Seems like with a minimal amount of tooling, we could have a pretty good
story. I think I'll ask on the general list, as other projects have gone
through this transition already - maybe they have tooling that could be
leveraged?

James


On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 4:24 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:

> I'm a bit late to this party. In fact I asked James the exact same thing
> offline and missed that the discussion is already going on.
>
> It seems we should start with doing this the "HBase-way". I.e. make
> patches, attach then to the jira.
> That way the jira/Apache-git is a full record of what happened and we do
> not rely to two copies of the source (Apache and GitHub), of which one
> might be behind.
>
> That leaves some power of git untapped (that even an oldfart like me is
> beginning to appreciate), and we should probably address that into the
> future.
>
> So I'd vote for (1) patches on jira, (2) reviews on review board when
> needed, (3) no mandatory git hub involvement.
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org>
> To: "dev@phoenix.incubator.apache.org" <dev@phoenix.incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 10:47 PM
> Subject: best development methodology for Apache git?
>
>
> I know you HBase guys use svn as your source of truth, but Phoenix is using
> git. With our old git repo which was hosted on github, we'd typically do
> work locally and then send a pull request to the source-of-truth github
> repo. That way others could comment on the pending commit before it was
> pulled in. Pulling it in could be done with a single click by someone with
> write privileges.
>
> Now, though, our source-of-truth is *not* on github, but on a git repo
> hosted by Apache. It's only mirrored to github in a read-only manner. Plus,
> it may be lagging behind the source-of-truth repo.
>
> What's the best, recommended methodology and ui to use for getting
>  feedback
> pre-commit?
>
> Thanks,
> James
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message