Agree about the need to use list. The GitHub pull requests were meant to be mirrored two-way with the dev@ list - if this stopped working we need to ping INFRA agian.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9398 could anyone reincarnate this or ping them on #asfinfra? I'm afraid I am a bit busy today.. INFRA might be a bit busy at ApacheCon which started today. On 13 April 2015 at 17:33, Reto Gmür <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Reviewing a pull request I saw that a lot of discussion is goin on there: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf/pull/7 > > conatining for example an important discussion point you raise: > > I have seen commons rdf as being for interoperability, not integration. Ie, >> it provides for passing objects across a boundary into another >> implementation, but doesn't require the other implementation to then agree >> on any further integration past what is required for future message passing >> operations to succeed. >> > > These comments never showed up on our list, this is problematic because at > apache "if its not on the list, it didn't happen". > > Cheers, > Reto > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Peter Ansell <ansell.pe...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Reto, >> >> If you prefer to post patches to Jira (or email) then feel free to do >> so. Pull Requests on GitHub are just a smooth and fluid modern method >> of reviewing patches that reduce the turnaround for comments and >> acceptance of changes, which is a big deal for some contributors here. >> >> In terms of voting on each issue, that is not going to happen. If the >> issue is large, we encourage discussion about it before merging, but >> we are not going to vote on whether to accept a patch for issues. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Peter >> >> On 11 April 2015 at 21:47, Reto Gmür <r...@apache.org> wrote: >> > So you are suggesting we are actually requiring committers to use GitHub? >> > Not sure what the difference between "propose/(PR|JIRA)" and "(email|JIRA >> > -> PR/review)+" is in Andy's proposal. >> > >> > Are the pull request automatically referenced in the Jira issues? Are >> code >> > commits already referenced (or do we have to ask Infra to enable this)? >> > >> > I think as our project is supposed to deliver little but high quality >> code >> > this would be a case for the RTC approach. My suggestion would have been >> to >> > have branches in git (typically one per issue) and then vote on merging >> it >> > into master. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Reto >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Sergio Fernández <wik...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> +1 the pragmatic approach Andy suggested >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Peter Ansell <ansell.pe...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > On 10 April 2015 at 03:49, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > > As a small project, I think we should be pragmatic: >> >> > > >> >> > > Things that are clearly fixes: >> >> > > commit-then-review >> >> > > Things that are localised changes: >> >> > > propose/(PR|JIRA) -> timeout -> commit >> >> > > Things that are major changes: >> >> > > (email|JIRA -> PR/review)+ -> commit >> >> > > >> >> > > making sure that the GH plumbing is actually sending the emails to >> dev@ >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > +1 for pragmatic. We are a very small project, so minor changes can >> >> > easily be reverted if they are not going to work, but if the change is >> >> > large it should be discussed first. >> >> > >> >> > Cheers, >> >> > >> >> > Peter >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sergio Fernández >> >> Partner Technology Manager >> >> Redlink GmbH >> >> m: +43 6602747925 >> >> e: sergio.fernan...@redlink.co >> >> w: http://redlink.co >> >> >> -- Stian Soiland-Reyes Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
