ambari-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gautam Borad <gbo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Code Review groups
Date Fri, 03 Jun 2016 06:31:39 GMT
+1 for Alejandro's suggestion for review groups.

My +1 for github-based pull request process. Its way easy/simpler than
Review board and works well with a git-based workflow.
Also, we can expect new features every
<https://github.com/blog/2111-issue-and-pull-request-templates> now
<https://github.com/blog/2119-add-reactions-to-pull-requests-issues-and-comments>
and then <https://github.com/blog/2123-more-code-review-tools>!

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Jungtaek Lim <kabhwan@gmail.com> wrote:

> As I'm just newbie contributors, I'm happy to respect the Ambari project
> policy, but if we would want to consider to revisit review process, I'd +1
> on Mithun.
> I just submitted two patches (may submit some more), and triggering Jenkins
> and submitting patch to review system was hurdle so that I was struggling
> several hours for that.
> And we can see the pull requests on Github mirror though project doesn't
> take pull request. It's well-known and easy way for open source
> contributors to participate.
>
> Thanks,
> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
>
> 2016년 6월 3일 (금) 오전 10:58, Mithun Mathew <mithmatt@gmail.com>님이
작성:
>
> > Just putting some thoughts in regarding the review board model:
> > Every time (I mean EVERY TIME!), I have to copy a bunch of things that I
> > listed in the JIRA (summary, description, branch, JIRA no, group, and
> > upload the same patch) to the review board - to me it is quite a lot of
> > redundant work.
> >
> > The Github pull request model with CI kicking off as soon as pull request
> > is made is ideal and I consider this to be more efficient.
> >
> > Anyone else have similar thoughts?
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Alejandro Fernandez <
> > afernandez@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you for the feedback. I created
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AMBARI/Code+Review+Guidelines
> > > as a starting point.
> > > I'm also looking into our workflow to see the pros/cons of switching to
> > > github + pull request model, or another code review provider with more
> > > advanced features.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Alejandro
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/2/16, 2:02 PM, "Sumit Mohanty" <smohanty@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >We can look into the already available component names in the JIRA for
> > > >the initial list.
> > > >We should not create fine-grained groups and aim to have at least 3-5
> > > >devs (more is better) in a single component/area.
> > > >
> > > >Possible list:
> > > >ambari-web
> > > >ambari-views
> > > >ambari-server
> > > >ambari-agent
> > > >stacks-framework/extensibility
> > > >stack-definitions (this could break into separate services)
> > > >blueprints
> > > >alerts/metrics
> > > >logsearch
> > > >security/kerberos/ldap
> > > >stack-upgrade/RU/EU
> > > >
> > > >Once the list is final lets make sure that the available list of
> > > >components in the JIRA matches this list.
> > > >
> > > >This is probably also a good opportunity to see if there are better
> > > >alternatives to reviews.apache.org.
> > > >
> > > >regards
> > > >Sumit
> > > >________________________________________
> > > >From: Jayush Luniya <jluniya@hortonworks.com>
> > > >Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 1:47 PM
> > > >To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > > >Subject: Re: Code Review groups
> > > >
> > > >+1 on this
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >On 6/2/16, 1:44 PM, "Swapan Shridhar" <sshridhar@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>+1. Makes sense.
> > > >>
> > > >>Thanks.
> > > >>
> > > >>Regards,
> > > >>Swapan.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>On 6/2/16, 1:27 PM, "Robert Levas" <rlevas@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>>Alejandro, I agree.  I just hope we (as a group) can manage the
wiki
> > > >>>page without letting it get too stale over time.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>+1
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Rob
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>On 6/2/16, 12:55 PM, "Alejandro Fernandez" <
> > afernandez@hortonworks.com>
> > > >>>wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>Hi committers and contributors,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>I'm sure most of you have ran into this before; whenever I
submit a
> > > >>>>code review I'm always curious to find out which reviewers
I should
> > > >>>>include that are knowledgeable in that area.
> > > >>>>So I'll typically run git blame to find the last 2-3 people
that
> > worked
> > > >>>>on those files, which takes time and may include reviewers
no
> longer
> > > >>>>interested in that code area or miss reviewers that are interested.
> > > >>>>I want to propose a wiki where developers sign up to be reviewers
> > for a
> > > >>>>particular section, could be a feature, directory, etc.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Thoughts?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>This allows developers to opt-in to areas of interest (even
outside
> > of
> > > >>>>their current expertise), should produce better code reviews,
and
> > make
> > > >>>>it easier for new contributors to find the right people.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Thank you,
> > > >>>>Alejandro Fernandez
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Mithun Mathew* (Matt)
> >
> >    - www.linkedin.com/in/mithunmatt/
> >
>



-- 
Regards,
Gautam.

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