On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn <[email protected]> wrote: > Out of ignorance: Just how interlinked is the code review process with > the issue tracker? Do you typically link code review up to tickets in > some way, or are pull requests completely standalone?
When a pull request is made, an issue is automatically created by github that links to the pull request. E.g.: https://github.com/ipython/ipython/pull/199 https://github.com/ipython/ipython/issues/199 If the pull request is merged *without rebasing* (by following something like the 3 steps given at the bottom of the request page) , github automatically notices that the commits from the request went in, and closes both the request and the issue for you without the need for any extra action. The act of pushing causes the closing of all. If you do rebase, github can't tell that you did merge the contents, so you'll have to click manually on the close button yourself (but closing the request auto-closes the associated bug history as well). Pull request pages remain available even after closed, so any discussion that takes place during a pull request (which often involves useful design discussions) remains accessible later on. This is something I think is very useful and I'm glad they thought of it (e.g. on launchpad, closed merge requests were very hard to find: they didn't get deleted, but there was nothing in the interface to find them unless you *manually* had made a bug for it to fish it back out later. Awful). In summary, pull/issue linking is: - automatic for opening, - automatic for no-rebase closing -if rebase did happen, you only need to manually close one for both to get closed. > With e.g. Google Code it seems we'd need to host the web page and > perhaps the wiki elsewhere (as Ondrej noted, the wiki on Google Code is > only editable by project members), so hosting the bug tracker somewhere > else and use github for the rest doesn't seem so bad. It's worth noting what Ondrej pointed out in his blog review: since github lets you host both the wiki and the webpages with more flexible controls (everything is a repo), you could get the whole thing on github. One more nice thing about having the issues at github, is that any commit that closes a bug only needs to say 'closes gh-NNN' or 'closes #NNN', and github will - automatically close the bug - make a link at the closed bug page to the commit page - make a link at the commit entry to the bug See for example: https://github.com/ipython/ipython/issues/148 https://github.com/ipython/ipython/commit/a55b74a629425e3344c8bad7b5994ebfc5b12085 This is very handy, because you know that the moment that commit gets pushed, everything will be automatically get taken care of. This good integration between commits and issues is a point in favor of keeping the issue hosting at github, despite the limnitations I complained about earlier. HTH, f _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
