Github pull requests are significantly better than review board: * They are tied to a git branch and thus reference the base commit. It is trivial to review changes to branches other than master. * Updating them is as easy as pushing an update to github. * The pull request and comments automatically get posted to jira. * The commit can reference the pull request to close it. * It is easy to see the open pull requests for Hive. https://github.com/apache/hive/pulls
Of course Hive can require patches be uploaded to jiras, just we do now. .. Owen On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Xuefu Zhang <xzh...@cloudera.com> wrote: > I understand that some projects are using pull request. However, I'm not > sure why we need to do the same just because that works for those projects. > Hive has its own working model. Unless it brings significant benefits, I > don't really see the point of switching. On the other hand, I will see a > learning curve for all contributors and a disruption of Hive change > history. > > thanks, > Xuefu > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Sergio Pena <sergio.p...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > I liked the idea of having pull requests as an option for review :). This > > way we could have our own local repository, and commit our changes to a > > personal branch instead of creating patches to RB for every new change. > > > > Just one question, is this going to affect the way the precommit tests > > work? I think we should be careful on merging a pull request with changes > > that hasn't been tested on JIRA. It should be cool if jenkins could test > > changes from a pull request, but it would add a lot of workload to > jenkins > > every time a new commit appears on the PR. > > > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Owen O'Malley <omal...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the link to the previous discussion. Much of the previous > > > discussion was about the discussion about git versus subversion. > > Obviously, > > > we decided to go forward with that. We already have pull requests on > > > github. See the list at https://github.com/apache/hive/pulls > > > > > > Without the Apache integration, we don't have any way to close those > pull > > > requests and none of the discussion flows back into the linked jiras or > > > email lists. > > > > > > .. Owen > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 7:38 PM, kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com < > > > kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I personally am a big fan of pull requests which is primarily the > > reason > > > > for a similar proposal that I made almost a year and half ago[1] :). > I > > > > think the consensus we reached at the time was that to move the > primary > > > > source code from svn to git(which we did) but still use patches > > submitted > > > > to JIRAs to maintain a permalink to the changes and also because it's > > > > little harder to treat a pull requests as a patch. > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > http://qnalist.com/questions/4754349/proposal-to-switch-to-pull-requests > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Owen O'Malley <omal...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > All, > > > > > I think we should use the github integrations that Apache infra > > has > > > > > introduced. You can read about it here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and > > > > > > > > > > The big win from my point of view is that you can use github pull > > > > requests > > > > > for doing reviews. All of the traffic from the pull request is sent > > to > > > > > Apache email lists and vice versa. > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Owen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Swarnim > > > > > > > > > >
