I would associate the upswing in introductions to increased marketing from joining incubator; orthogonal to moving out of github.
No one has suggested moving away from patches attached to JIRA. As I said, patch on JIRA is what we'll eventually need for pre-commit checking anyway. I'd like the github mirror to be activated, which Jake has done. I'd also like PR's to show up as a mail to the dev list and, if possible, also land on the associated JIRA as a comment. I maintain that this will make it easier for non-Apache folks who fork-and-PR to get our attention without much fuss on either end. Does your -1 apply to PRs resulting in a mail on the dev list? -n On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, Colin P. McCabe <[email protected]> wrote: > The argument keeps getting made that we have to be on github "to make > it easy for outsiders to contribute" but I don't see any evidence to > back that up. Quite the contrary, during the time HTrace was a github > project, the number of contributions and contributors were much > smaller than now. > > Objectively, the JIRA workflow is not difficult to learn. The number > of new and recent contributors that Hadoop has is a testament to that. > And many other very successful projects use the same model. I would > argue that to the average developer, attaching a text file to a JIRA > is easier to understand than creating a branch and a pull request in > github. It's certainly easier for a first-timer than the upload > process of reviewboard or gerrit. > > I think if we are being honest with ourselves, the only valid reason > to switch away from patch attachments on JIRA is the convenience of > developers. Elliot has said that he doesn't like having to click on > "attach patch." Some things that haven't been brought up, but which > ought to be, are that reviews in JIRA require some cut-n-paste, and > that you need to install a Google Chrome extension to see side-by-side > diffs. > > My opinion is that while these things are kind of annoying, they're > really not that bad. Having to explain what the difference is in my > latest patch versus the previous one takes much more time and mental > effort than clicking on "attach patch." There are even scripts out > there to automatically attach patches. Copying a few lines to the > clipboard to suggest changes during a review isn't bad... in some ways > I prefer it to clicking all those "expand discussion" arrows in other > code review tools. > > Colin > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > There's a joke here about N devs in a room and N opinions that are all > right > > (and all wrong)! > > > > All I'm asking for here is to make it easy for outsiders to contribute. > > Having HTrace show up in the mirror is a big step. The next logical > thing is > > folks will click the fork button. We should be ready to receive the > incoming > > help; the details of that implementation are less important to me. > > > > Whatever our individual opinions, GH is a defacto place for developers > these > > days -- their tools are extremely well socialized. It's a shame to cut > > ourselves off from users of that community. I happen to share Colin's > > opinions about the inferiority of GH's interface for historical comments > (I > > personally like gerrit the best of the tools I've used), but that doesn't > > mean we should shun it. (I also generally loath JIRA, on par with > Elliott's > > thoughts). > > > > I think the Apache infra allows comments on PRs that are tied to a JIRA > to > > land in the comments on the associated JIRA. Is that right Jake? It > doesn't > > prevent the patch from disappearing from github, but at least the trail > of > > discussion is preserved and the "single page scroll down" consumption is > > still possible. I think we as a project can make it a policy that a patch > > must be attached to the JIRA, not just living in a PR (we'll want that > for > > pre-commit build bot support anyway, right?) Use the PR as another means > of > > review, not the source of truth on the the change itself. Would that be > > enough for you Colin? > > > > On the topic of Gerrit, there was a discussion about bringing it about > for > > Apache projects. It's been raised and died and raised a number of times. > > Gerrit for reviews and push gating + github style build hook detection > would > > be a great setup for me as well. Maybe we should investigate that as a > > separate thread? > > > > -n > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Elliott Clark <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > >> For me pull requests show great history for the issue if things don't > get > >> bounced around too many different creators. Github really struggles when > >> there are issues that hang around for a long time, either because they > don't > >> have patches yet, or because lots of different people are creating > candidate > >> patches. However for me email copies of everything that's from github > >> provide all the search-ability that I would need to just use github. > >> > >> However for me Jira is just so disconnected from the code that it's a > >> total time sink. I want to create code, look at code, and have my code > >> tested. Every time I have to create a patch and attach it it's a total > >> context switch (better than RB but that's not saying much). The > integration > >> of jira and jenkins just feels like duct-tape and hope when compared to > the > >> hooks provided by github. So for me jira seems bad at creating patches, > >> reviewing patches, and testing patches. > >> > >> I've used gerrit before and it's awesome. Just a joy to use once things > >> are set up and moving. However I don't think that it will work since > it's > >> not supported by infra and it needs to be the source of truth for a git > >> repo. > >> > >> My preferences, in order, would be > >> > >> * Gerrit > >> * Github only > >> * Github with Jira integration > >> * Phabricator with jira > >> * Review board > >> * Jira only > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Colin P. McCabe <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Pull requests aren't a replacement for JIRA, because they don't allow > >>> you to see the history of an issue over time, link it to other issues, > >>> post pictures or other observations, talk to the community, and so on. > >>> In a word, github isn't a bug tracker. And the bug tracker that > >>> github does offer is very inadequate... even projects that go entirely > >>> github usually use an external bug tracker for this reason. > >>> > >>> I agree that reviewboard is a bad experience. The big issue with RB > >>> has always been that it's clunky to post patches. With JIRA, for all > >>> it's faults, I just click "attach file," select the file, and go. > >>> With RB, I have to fill out a form reminiscent of an IRS 1040 every > >>> time I post a patch. Yes, I realize there are uploader scripts. But > >>> after my uploader script broke the third time, I just decided it > >>> wasn't worth it and used the RB interface from then on. I just don't > >>> have time to debug uploader problems, especially things like "you > >>> forgot to use --full-index, now I'm going to say 'file doesn't exist > >>> in project'" > >>> > >>> Jake, can you go into more detail about how Crucible is "slow and > >>> painful to use"? Do you mean that the interface is not responsive? I > >>> haven't used Crucible before, but I would be up for evaluating it. > >>> > >>> I would be up for evaluating gerrit IF we had a plugin that mirrored > >>> the gerrit comments to JIRA so that they were indexable and searchable > >>> through normal means. I have used gerrit before. It offers a great > >>> uploading experience (just do "git push"), a GUI for making comments > >>> on patches, and the ability to submit a patch with one click. > >>> > >>> Colin > >>> > >>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Elliott Clark <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Jake Farrell <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> > >>> > wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> I'm a fan of reviewboard and think that the > >>> >> projects that have used it have had little issues with it > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > Uggggh review board's never been a good experience for me. If I had > my > >>> > druthers I'd go all github all the time. Drop jira completely. For me > >>> > the > >>> > pull requests ui is just much closer to how I work. > >> > >> > > >
