There's nothing that stops people from using github to discuss code changes. Many jiras already link to gh branches that can be used to review and comment code. But it's not always the best place to do so.
The high level discussion should always take place on Jira. Although I'd have no problem to see in-depth code reviewing happening on gh, I'd hate to see significant parts of the discussion as a whole spread across Jira and different PRs related to the ticket. The missing gh integration with Jira and lack of administrative permissions is another problem. If we close a Jira ticket, the corresponding PRs will still stay open. We either have to ask the contributor to close it or have an ever growing number of open PRs. There's also no way for us to label, assign or otherwise use PR related features, so I'm really wondering why it would make sense to more heavily using them. On 12.12.2017 09:02, Marcus Eriksson wrote: > To be able to use the github code review UI and closer CI integration we > should make it obligatory to submit github pull requests for all code > changes. > > The process would be: > 1. Create or find a JIRA ticket > 2. Submit GH pull request > - one PR per branch (one for 3.0, one for 3.11 etc) > - the PR title should mention the JIRA ticket so that the PR gets > linked on the JIRA > 3. Have it reviewed and approved on GH > 4. Committer needs to do the manual work of getting the code committed to > the apache repo like today > - having "closes #123" in the commit message closes the pull request. > Adding the same line to the merge commit messages should close the PRs for > the different branches > > Apache Spark does something similar and their guidelines are here: > https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html > > Anyone got any concerns or improvement suggestions to this? > > /Marcus > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
