Thanks for clarification, Andrew. I was thinking that it needs RM’s approval to 
commit to 
branch-1.2/1.3/1.4, so unless it is a critical/major fix, by default, it goes 
to branch-1.

It is now clear and I think every committer will follow this best practice.

Thanks
Huaxiang

> On Jul 23, 2018, at 12:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the great question.
> 
> I can't speak for every RM, but I believe the answer in general is no, you
> do not need to get the RM's approval. Personally, I only ask that
> committers hold off when trying to make a release, and only if I need time
> to stabilize the unit tests on a branch. Normally I do a CTR like review
> over the commit history in the branch since the last release, and often
> only in response to unit test failures or API compatibility check errors.
> 
> I would encourage everyone on the project to avoid coordination where
> possible. Coordination is expensive. Use lock free design principles for
> both the software and community practices.
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 12:42 PM Huaxiang Sun <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
>> Thanks Andrew for bringing this up. I have one following up question.
>> When pushing to 1.2/1.3/1.4, do we need to get RM's approval?
>> 
>> Huaxiang
>> 
>>> On Jul 23, 2018, at 12:24 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I forgot to mention if a commit is only made to master, then the RM who
>>> happens to be looking at history has to take on the task of backporting
>> the
>>> change if it turns out to be a bug fix germane to release branches. The
>>> worst thing you can do as a committer is take a bug fix change, only
>> commit
>>> it to trunk, resolve the JIRA, and walk away. The second worst thing is
>> to
>>> commit only to trunk and leave the JIRA open. There is currently one one
>>> committer doing these things on a frequent basis. I ask that this
>> practice
>>> stop. Please view this behavior as poor maintenance practice that should
>> be
>>> avoided. Frankly, better you not commit the change at all. You are not
>>> helping the project. It is a net negative.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 12:18 PM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There is a recent trend in JIRA management where a change being tracked
>> by
>>>> one JIRA is committed only to master, or maybe master and branch-2, and
>>>> then the JIRA is left open. The fix versions may or may not be updated.
>> The
>>>> biggest offender is Ted Yu but newer committers are also occasionally
>> doing
>>>> it. Ted has no excuse, the rest is understandable.
>>>> 
>>>> Please be advised this makes release management difficult. The RM has to
>>>> look at every commit in the repository and then make sure JIRA reflects
>> the
>>>> correct fix version. Otherwise the generated change log for the release
>>>> will be incorrect. If more patches are pending for other branches, and
>> the
>>>> fix versions are not set correctly, then the RM may miss the patch and
>> not
>>>> include it into the release.
>>>> 
>>>> This is the best practice:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Set the fix versions for all relevant branches on the JIRA
>>>> 2. Assemble patches for all relevant branches on the JIRA
>>>> 3. Commit all of the patches at once to all relevant branches
>>>> 4. Mark the JIRA resolved
>>>> 
>>>> I understand there are a lot of branches now, and some changes require
>>>> backports. In this case, commit the patch at hand to the branches it
>> will
>>>> apply to, then open a new JIRA (could be as a subtask) for the backport.
>>>> Make sure to set fix versions appropriately so the RMs will see it.
>>>> 
>>>> If our slipping JIRA discipline is not improved we will have incorrect
>>>> release change logs, fewer releases, releases missing changes they
>> should
>>>> include, and other poor outcomes.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Andrew
>>>> 
>>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>>> decrepit hands
>>>>  - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Andrew
>>> 
>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>> decrepit hands
>>>  - A23, Crosstalk
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Andrew
> 
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
>   - A23, Crosstalk

Reply via email to