The "Patch Available" state in JIRA can mean a patch is attached to the JIRA, or a PR is submitted.
It is really just a manual state transition on the ticket after In-Progress... the next state is patch available which tells people there is something to review. On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Andrew Psaltis <psaltis.and...@gmail.com> wrote: > Totally agree on all fronts. Would seem like it makes sense for a > documentation PR to be opened soon with updates to the > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Contributor+Guide#ContributorGuide-CodeReviewProcess > page to remove the ambiguity. > > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Bryan Bende <bbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> They are treated with same priority, but as Oleg mentioned, the PRs do >> make it easier for collaborative review and has the built in integration >> with Travis, although currently some issues to get it consistently working. >> >> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Suneel Marthi <smar...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> PR is the standard now across most Apache projects. >>> >>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Oleg Zhurakousky < >>> ozhurakou...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Andrew >>>> >>>> Regarding PR vs. Patch. >>>> >>>> This has been an ongoing discussion and i’ll let other’s to contribute >>>> to this. Basically we support both. That said, personally (and it appears >>>> to be embraced by the rest of the community) PR is the preference >>>> specifically due to the inline review/comment capabilities provided by >>>> GitHub. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> Oleg >>>> >>>> > On May 3, 2016, at 11:18 AM, Andrew Psaltis <psaltis.and...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Thank you Oleg! >>>> > >>>> > Yeah, that page with the Code Review, has a little refresh link, but >>>> it >>>> > really just points to this JIRA query: >>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1837?filter=12331874 >>>> > >>>> > As a community is there a preference given to JIRA's with Patch or GH >>>> PR's >>>> > or are they all treated with the same priority? >>>> > >>>> > Thanks, >>>> > Andrew >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Oleg Zhurakousky < >>>> > ozhurakou...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Andrew >>>> >> >>>> >> Thank you so much for following up on this. >>>> >> I am assuming you have GitHub account. If not please create one as >>>> most of >>>> >> our contributions deal with pull requests (PR). >>>> >> Then you can go to https://github.com/apache/nifi , click on “Pull >>>> >> Requests” and review them by commenting in line (you can see plenty >>>> of >>>> >> examples there of PRs that are already in review process). >>>> >> >>>> >> I would also suggest to get familiar with Contributor’s guideline >>>> for NiFi >>>> >> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Contributor+Guide. >>>> But >>>> >> it appears you have already done so and I think there may be small >>>> >> discrepancy in the link you provided or may be it is not as dynamic. >>>> >> In any event JIRA and GutHub are good resources to use. >>>> >> >>>> >> As for the last question, the best case scenario is both (code >>>> review and >>>> >> test). Having said that we do realize that your time and the time of >>>> every >>>> >> contributor may be limited, so I say whatever you can. Some time >>>> quick code >>>> >> scan can uncover the obvious that doesn’t need testing. >>>> >> >>>> >> Thanks again >>>> >> Cheers >>>> >> Oleg >>>> >> >>>> >> On May 3, 2016, at 11:07 AM, Andrew Psaltis < >>>> psaltis.and...@gmail.com> >>>> >> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Oleg, >>>> >> I would love to help -- couple of quick questions: >>>> >> >>>> >> The GH PR's are ~60 as you indicated, but the How To Contribute >>>> guide (Code >>>> >> review process -- >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Contributor+Guide#ContributorGuide-CodeReviewProcess >>>> >> ) shows a JIRA list with patches available. >>>> >> >>>> >> Which should be reviewed first? For the PR's on GH are you just >>>> looking for >>>> >> code review or same process of apply local merge and test? >>>> >> >>>> >> Thanks, >>>> >> Andrew >>>> >> >>>> >> On 5/3/16, 9:58 AM, "Oleg Zhurakousky" <ozhurakou...@hortonworks.com >>>> > >>>> >> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Guys >>>> >> >>>> >> I’d like to use this opportunity to address all members of the NiFi >>>> >> >>>> >> community hence this email is sent to both mailing lists (dev/users) >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> While somewhat skeptical when I started 6 month ago, I have to admit >>>> that >>>> >> >>>> >> now I am very excited to observe the growth and adaption of the >>>> Apache NiFi >>>> >> and say that in large part it’s because of the healthy community >>>> that we >>>> >> have here - committers and contributors alike representing variety of >>>> >> business domains. >>>> >> >>>> >> This is absolutely great news for all of us and I am sure some if >>>> not all >>>> >> >>>> >> of you share this sentiment. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> That said and FWIW we need help! >>>> >> While it’s great to wake up every morning to a set of new PRs and >>>> patches, >>>> >> >>>> >> we now have a bit of a back log. In large this is due to the fact >>>> that most >>>> >> of our efforts are spent in development as we all try to grow NiFi >>>> feature >>>> >> base. However we need to remember that PRs and patches will remain >>>> as they >>>> >> are unless and until they are reviewed/agreed to be merged by this >>>> same >>>> >> community and that is where we need help. While “merge" >>>> responsibilities >>>> >> are limited to “committers”, “review” is the responsibility of every >>>> member >>>> >> of this community and I would like to ask you if at all possible to >>>> >> redirect some of your efforts to this process. >>>> >> >>>> >> We currently have 61 outstanding PRs and this particular development >>>> cycle >>>> >> >>>> >> is a bit more complex then the previous ones since it addresses >>>> 0.7.0 and >>>> >> 1.0.0 releases in parallel (so different approach to breaking >>>> changes if >>>> >> any etc.) >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Cheers >>>> >> Oleg >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> Thanks, >>>> >> Andrew >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Thanks, >>>> > Andrew >>>> > >>>> > Subscribe to my book: Streaming Data <http://manning.com/psaltis> >>>> > <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-psaltis/1/17b/306> >>>> > twiiter: @itmdata <http://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=itmdata >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > Thanks, > Andrew > > Subscribe to my book: Streaming Data <http://manning.com/psaltis> > <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-psaltis/1/17b/306> > twiiter: @itmdata <http://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=itmdata> >
