I dont know about the other pmc members and committers but I prefer just making Gerrit the only way to submit patches rather than one of many. It seems to work well for Asterix and Kudu. On Apr 25, 2016 12:16 PM, "Todd Lipcon" <t...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Wes McKinney <w...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > hi Todd, > > > > This is helpful to know, thank you. As you say, by "optional" what I > > meant was that code could be optionally reviewed in Gerrit, but then > > commits would have to be cherry-picked by the committer from the > > Gerrit git remote. We would continue to accept patches via GitHub pull > > requests (but for larger patches, they may move from GitHub to gerrit > > as need be). Unless there is some pitfall here that I'm missing. > > > > The pitfall is what the state of the gerrit remote looks like. How do you > keep it up to date with the ASF repo, if you have patches entering the ASF > repo from some mechanism other than gerrit? > > It might be possible involving some cron job which force pushes from ASF -> > Gerrit, but I haven't ever tried a workflow like that. > > -Todd > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > Using gerrit as an "optional" tool is a bit difficult, because it > doesn't > > > know how to handle commits to a repository that it doesn't own. > > > > > > The way we get around the "commit via gerrit" issue in the Kudu podling > > is > > > to follow the example of AsterixDB. Commits are made using gerrit, but > > that > > > doesn't automatically flow to the ASF repo. The committer then runs a > > > 'push-to-asf.py' script which grabs the commit from gerrit and pushes > to > > > the ASF repository: > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kudu/blob/master/build-support/push_to_asf.py > > > > > > I'm happy to set up the gerrit projects, but not sure how it would work > > in > > > an "optional" context. > > > > > > -Todd > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Julian Hyde <jhyde.apa...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> IIRC Apex wanted to commit via Gerrit. That was a non-starter. Commits > > >> have to be made by a committer. > > >> > > >> Julian > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Apr 24, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Wes McKinney <w...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Sending all Gerrit review activity to the mailing list seems > adequate > > to > > >> me. > > >> > I don't see how this is especially different from reviewing code on > a > > >> > website owned by GitHub. I remain hopeful that ASF Infra will set up > > an > > >> > ASF-managed Gerrit. > > >> > > > >> > On Sunday, April 24, 2016, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Just for the record, Apex had some issues getting Gerrit reviews > > >> reflected > > >> >> in a coherent fashion into the Apache record. I presume that you > guys > > >> will > > >> >> have that handled or will check with the Apex devs to learn their > > >> >> resolution. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Todd Lipcon > > > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera >
