One most important +1 for referencing Github over Gitbox is that Pull Requests are not synced into git-box. Therefore committers can't check that out that PR from the gitbox repo into a test branch in their local clone. When preferring gitbox over Github the project is - in essence - saying: if you (non-privileged contributor) want a privileged contributor to review and merge your commits into a branch of the official repository you need to attach patch files, because those without the GitHub location in their local setup won't see your pull request and thus can't check it out via git.
Another +1 for referencing Github over Gitbox is that a sends a unified message to all community members (privileged and non-privileged alike) on what to work with. Furthermore, the current howto for committers ( https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Git+for+committers) is outdated and still references svn, suggesting that svn is still in play, and keeps the project limping on 2 legs. We have to keep in mind that many within the greater ASF community and (I presume those within) the Github organisation regard repositories under the Apache flag (https://github.com/apache) as official repositories of the Apache projects. Best regards, Pierre Smits *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President* *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without privileges) since 2008* Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 11:20 AM Jacques Le Roux < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have modified the title to make it more clear (Confluence does not like > special chars, like &, (, ), you name it...) > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributing+via+Git+and+Github++-+WIP > > I have added a warning about plugins inside framework (no auto sync). I > added the same about pullAllPluginsSource but Pierre rpreferred we focus > only > on Git in this page. So he remove it, I agree. > > I fixed some typos > > All is here anyway > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpreviousversions.action?pageId=145724011 > > Now the question is: should we privilege GitHub over GitBox, as advocated > in this page? > > As ever there are 2 faces of the coin: > > Pro: easier for PR and to follow GitHub workflow (pragmatic) > > Cons: not official, GitHub is only a mirror from ASF POV (theoretical) > > Note that some TLP projects are using GitHub as proposed by Jacopo's link > to Apache Rocket in this page > > HTH > > Jacques > > Le 06/02/2020 à 13:44, Pierre Smits a écrit : > > Hi All, > > > > I have completed the first draft of the Contributing via Git & Github > (WIP) > > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=145724011 > > > > page. > > And it is now available for review. > > > > Please review and let the community know what you think needs to be: > > > > 1. added > > 2. deleted > > 3. explained better > > > > Best regards, > > > > Pierre Smits > > > > *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President* > > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > > Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer > > *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without > privileges) > > since 2008* > > Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 3:53 PM Pierre Smits <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Pull Requests can be handled in the local development of the committer > the > >> same way as patch files. Whereas a committer would create a new test > branch > >> in his local clone and apply a patch file to evaluate the changes, the > >> process regarding Pull Request can be considered as easier. > >> > >> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In > order > >> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git > >> configuration of the local clone: > >> > >> fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/* > >> > >> > >> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch = > >> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote. > >> > >> The committer can check out the Pull Request into his local clone from > the > >> Github repository and review in accordance with the committer > conventions > >> and protocols. If need be, he can apply the slight changes, add > >> additional commits of his own through cherry-picking and commit the > whole > >> with a commit-message in accordance with the template and then merge > into > >> the appropriate official OFBiz branche(s). And after that, push what > needs > >> to be pushed to the official OFBiz repo. > >> > >> A Pull Request can also be closed without a merges into any of the > >> branches in the official repositories, but this must be done in Github > as > >> it is not a git feature. > >> > >> Btw and IMO, it is better that committers also have their git setup work > >> with the repos on GitHub instead of Gitbox. The ASF git services will > >> ensure that both are kept in sync. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Pierre Smits > >> > >> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President* > >> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > >> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer > >> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without > privileges) > >> since 2008* > >> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 2:59 PM Nicolas Malin <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Nice thread and sharing :) > >>> > >>> I retain that the must important idea is keep the historic commit with > >>> high quality. > >>> > >>> My vision is we can let all contributer to create some PR with a "bad" > >>> branch quality, this permit to follow the historic link to this PR. The > >>> merge on trunk will be done with the commiter touch to realize the > >>> squashing and set the comment related. > >>> > >>> I didn't think that we can validate directly a PR, because if it's > done, > >>> this indicate that the contributer as "a commiter level" concerning the > >>> commit quality. Then it's a fact that the community rules has been > learn > >>> and apply, good way to become a commiter. > >>> > >>> I understand the same idea on the RocketQM documentation concerning a > PR > >>> merge to trunk. > >>> > >>> So, I'm in favor the let all PR with only one rule for the submit, > >>> create an issue on Jira as Daniel Watford done with issue OFBIZ-11330 > >>> [1]. In other word, create your PR as you want, just initialize an > issue > >>> for step down to a commiter that will finish the merge (as a code > keeper). > >>> > >>> Nicolas > >>> > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-11330 > >>> > >>> On 31/01/2020 10:23, Pierre Smits wrote: > >>>> Thank you, Jacopo, for bringing forward the approach of Apache > >>> RocketMQ. I > >>>> will add that reference to the Contributing via Git & Github (WIP) > >>>> < > >>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=145724011 > >>>> page > >>>> so that it isn't forgotten. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> > >>>> Pierre Smits > >>>> > >>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President* > >>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > >>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer > >>>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without > >>> privileges) > >>>> since 2008* > >>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 10:00 AM Jacopo Cappellato < > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I am happy we are having this conversation because, once finalized, > we > >>> will > >>>>> optimize our usage of Git (and GitHub)! > >>>>> > >>>>> On this topic, I like the workflow and the documentation provided by > >>> one of > >>>>> the other Apache project, RocketQM: > >>>>> https://rocketmq.apache.org/docs/pull-request/ > >>>>> > >>>>> In my opinion we could follow a similar approach and provide similar > >>>>> documentation to our contributors and committers. > >>>>> > >>>>> Jacopo > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 5:10 PM Michael Brohl < > >>> [email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I mean squashing in the sense of pulling several commits together > in a > >>>>>> single commit (with a quality commit message). This could also be a > >>> diff > >>>>>> which is applied as a patch manually. I am not just referring to the > >>>>>> GitHub function. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I really don't want to see all kinds of exotic messages coming up in > >>> our > >>>>>> commit history. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If the workflow allows rejecting a pull request because of bad > commit > >>>>>> messages or maybe a hundred commits for a change, I would also be > fine > >>>>>> with it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My main point is that I'm a bit worried about quality because it is > >>> much > >>>>>> easier to pull in a pull request instead of applying a patch. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Applying a patch also results in a single commit and the committer > can > >>>>>> handle the message while a pull request maybe results in several > >>> commits > >>>>>> each with its own message which are in the hands of the contributor. > >>>>>> Applying a patch and changing things where necessary is also easier > >>>>>> because you can clearly see the changed files in your sandbox ("your > >>>>>> slightly midified patch is in trunk r..."). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If I am not wrong, accepting a pull request does a forward merge > >>>>>> directly so you have to find the locations again where you want to > >>> make > >>>>>> changes. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I guess reverting will also be more difficult if the pull request > >>>>>> contains more than one commit. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It *could* be reasonable to request single commit pull requests to > >>> avoid > >>>>>> all this, leaving the work to "squash" and write quality commit > >>> messages > >>>>>> up to the contributor. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I am not against using PR's but I also worry about the downsides and > >>>>>> additional work for contributors dealing with them. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Michael Brohl > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Am 30.01.20 um 16:33 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: > >>>>>>> At 1st glance, based on my experience with squashing I tend to > agree > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Jacques > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Le 30/01/2020 à 16:04, Pierre Smits a écrit : > >>>>>>>> Having 'quality commit message' should not pose a problem when > >>>>>>>> contributors > >>>>>>>> (authors) apply the template for their commit message. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> See as an example the messages of the commit I have in pull > request > >>>>>>>> #2 in > >>>>>>>> ofbiz-plugins (https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-plugins/pull/2). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The question is whether a commit message like in > >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-plugins/pull/1 would be rejected. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> AFAIUI, the issue with squashing commits is, when they are shared > >>> with > >>>>>>>> others, that history will be rewritten and thus causing trouble > for > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>> other parties. > >>>>>>>> IMO, squashing should not occur when a pull request has been > issued. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Pierre Smits > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President* > >>>>>>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > >>>>>>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer > >>>>>>>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without > >>>>>>>> privileges) > >>>>>>>> since 2008* > >>>>>>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:42 PM Michael Brohl < > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Just a quick thought because I currently cannot dig deeper: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We should also have a workflow (or better: requirement) to either > >>>>> write > >>>>>>>>> quality commit messages for every commit or squash changes and > >>> have a > >>>>>>>>> quality commit message for the resulting commit. If people do a > lot > >>>>> of > >>>>>>>>> commits during their work on a change, we might not want to have > >>> all > >>>>>>>>> these commits in our project history. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Michael Brohl > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits: > >>>>>>>>>> Hi All, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal > with > >>>>>>>>>> commits > >>>>>>>>>> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github. > >>>>>>>>>> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has > to > >>>>>>>>>> do with > >>>>>>>>>> the commit message (as defined in > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template > >>>>>>>>>> ). > >>>>>>>>>> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this > >>>>>>>>>> commit > >>>>>>>>>> message appears in: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 1. the OFBiz repo > >>>>>>>>>> 2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list > >>>>>>>>>> 3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the > >>>>> commit > >>>>>>>>>> section, see e.g. > >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954) > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly > >>>>>>>>>> occurring > >>>>>>>>>> blog posts of the project. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that > >>> more > >>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish > >>> their > >>>>>>>>>> code > >>>>>>>>>> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from > >>> there > >>>>>>>>> issue > >>>>>>>>>> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community > >>>>>>>>>> members > >>>>>>>>>> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the > >>>>>>>>>> contributor - or > >>>>>>>>>> in git parlance: the author). > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each > of > >>>>> his > >>>>>>>>>> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message > >>> template > >>>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. > >>>>>>>>>> Which is > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>> evaluation of the contribution by other community members. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Is my assessment so far correct? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice > President* > >>>>>>>>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > >>>>>>>>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer > >>>>>>>>>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without > >>>>>>>>> privileges) > >>>>>>>>>> since 2008* > >>>>>>>>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer > >>>>>>>>>> >
