To clarify my position: Github PRs are great for *reviewing* code, and the commentary is much easier to follow imo. But for *merging* code, esp into our multi-branch strategy, PRs don't fit well, unless there's some technique I and perhaps others are unaware of.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 9:47 AM Ariel Weisberg <ar...@weisberg.ws> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not clear on what github makes worse. It preserves more history then > the JIRA approach. When people invitably force push their branches you > can't tell from the link to a branch on JIRA. Github preserves the comments > and force push history so you know what version of the code each comment > applied to. Github also tracks when requests for changes are acknowledged > and resolved. I have had to make the same change request many times and > keep track independently whether it was resolved. This has also resulting > in mistakes getting merged when I missed a comment that was ignored. > > Now that github can CC JIRA that also CCs to commits@. It's better then > JIRA comments because each comment includes a small diff of the code the > comment applies to. To do that in JIRA I have to manually link to the code > the PR and most people don't do that for every comment so some of them are > inscrutable after the fact. Also manually created links sometimes refer to > references that disappear or get force pushed. It's a bit tricky to get > right. > > To me arguing against leveraging a better code review workflow (whether > github or some other tool) is like arguing against using source control > tools. Sure the filesystem and home grown scripts can be used to work > around lack of source control, but why would you? > > I see two complaints so far. One is that github PRs encourage nitpicking. > I don't see tool based solution to that off the cuff. Another is that > github doesn't by default CC JIRA. Maybe we can just refuse to accept > improperly formatted PRs and look into auto rejecting ones that don't refer > to a ticket? > > Ariel > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018, at 12:20 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > > There are some nice benefits to GH PRs, one of them is that we could > > eventually set up CircleCI hooks that would explicitly prevent commits > > that don’t pass the tests. > > > > But handling multiple branches would indeed be annoying. Would have to > > either submit 1 PR per branch - which is both tedious and non-atomic - > > or do a mixed approach, with a PR for the oldest branch, then a manual > > merge upwards. The latter would be kinda meh, especially when commits > > for different branches diverge. > > > > For me personally, the current setup works quite well, and I mostly > > share Sylvain’s opinion above, for the same reasons listed. > > > > — > > AY > > > > > On 13 Dec 2018, at 08:15, Sylvain Lebresne <lebre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Fwiw, I personally find it very useful to have all discussion, review > > > comments included, in the same place (namely JIRA, since for better or > > > worse, that's what we use for tracking tickets). Typically, that means > > > everything gets consistently pushed to the commits@ mailing list, > which I > > > find extremely convenient to keep track of things. I also have a theory > > > that the inline-comments type of review github PR give you is very > > > convenient for nitpicks, shallow or spur-of-the-moment comments, but > > > doesn't help that much for deeper reviews, and that it thus to favor > the > > > former kind of review. > > > > > > Additionally, and to Benedict's point, I happen to have first hand > > > experience with a PR-based process for a multi-branch workflow very > similar > > > to the one of this project, and suffice to say that I hate it with a > > > passion. > > > > > > Anyway, very much personal opinion here. > > > -- > > > Sylvain > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 2:13 AM dinesh.jo...@yahoo.com.INVALID > > > <dinesh.jo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > >> I've been already using github PRs for some time now. Once you > specify the > > >> ticket number, the comments and discussion are persisted in Apache > Jira as > > >> work log so it can be audited if desired. However, committers usually > > >> squash and commit the changes once the PR is approved. We don't use > the > > >> merge feature in github. I don't believe github we can merge the > commit > > >> into multiple branches through the UI. We would need to merge it into > one > > >> branch and then manually merge that commit into other branches. The > big > > >> upside of using github PRs is that it makes collaborating a lot > easier. > > >> Downside is that it makes it very difficult to follow along the > progress in > > >> Apache Jira. The messages that github posts back include huge diffs > and are > > >> aweful. > > >> Dinesh > > >> > > >> On Thursday, December 13, 2018, 1:10:12 AM GMT+5:30, Benedict > Elliott > > >> Smith <bened...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> > > >> Perhaps somebody could summarise the tradeoffs? I’m a little > concerned > > >> about how it would work for our multi-branch workflow. Would we open > > >> multiple PRs? > > >> > > >> Could we easily link with external CircleCI? > > >> > > >> It occurs to me, in JIRA proposal mode, that an extra required field > for a > > >> permalink to GitHub for the patch would save a lot of time I spend > hunting > > >> for a branch in the comments. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> On 12 Dec 2018, at 19:20, jay.zhu...@yahoo.com.INVALID wrote: > > >>> > > >>> It was discussed 1 year's ago: > > >> https://email@example.com/msg11810.html > > >>> As all Apache projects are moving to gitbox: > > >> https://reference.apache.org/committer/github, should we revisit > that and > > >> change our review/commit process to use github PR?A good example is > > >> Spark:"Changes to Spark source code are proposed, reviewed and > committed > > >> via Github pull requests" (https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html > ). > > >>> /jay > > >> > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > >