Thanks, Jesse. Agree that (2) sounds like the best option. I'll ask on the general list too.
What's the HadoopQA bot? Thanks, James On Wednesday, January 29, 2014, Jesse Yates <jesse.k.ya...@gmail.com> wrote: > Git is just a source control system - it was github that lead to the > prevalence of the pull requests and merges. > > Whatever we do for reviews, we basically need to use git like svn and fully > sync the repo each time, apply the patch, and then commit. Git hosting just > means ppl work in the same source control as the project and its easier to > do things like feature branches. > > For reviews/discussion, Id recommend we do one of two things: > 1. Do just what HBase does and post patches on Jiras, discuss there, and > take any extra discussion to review board. This makes it really easy to > follow for any downstream projects. However, review board only works on > trunk - patches on older versions tend to be a bit harder to review. > > 2. Use jiras for discussion and then do reviews on pull requests against > the apache github mirror. It can be a little out of date, but tends to be > pretty close. The advantage being that can have reviews more easily against > any branch. Once the review is good, the comitter would download the patch, > attach it to the jira (so downstream projects can keep track of the jiras > and their patches) and the commit it. I've heard of projects doing this, > but can't recall the exact names right now. > > I'm leaning towards (2), but think either would work fine. Its just been a > pain in the past for HBase when reviewing large 0.94 patches to have to > manually review the patch, rather than use a really review tool; using pull > requests would solve this, but adds a little complication to the process > (though people still do pull requests against HBase sometimes, so maybe not > so hard to figure out?) > > Just my $0.03 > > --j > > PS we should also consider getting something like the HadoopQA bot going > for phoenix too > On Jan 28, 2014 11:10 PM, "Devaraj Das" <d...@hortonworks.com<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > And there is reviewboard which is pretty widely used in HBase for the > > code review (and that works off git repo too).. > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Devaraj Das > > <d...@hortonworks.com<javascript:;> > > > > wrote: > > > Hey James, couldn't we use the jira comments as a way to > > > discuss/feedback, even though we use git repo? > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:47 PM, James Taylor > > > <jamestay...@apache.org<javascript:;> > > > > wrote: > > >> I know you HBase guys use svn as your source of truth, but Phoenix is > > using > > >> git. With our old git repo which was hosted on github, we'd typically > do > > >> work locally and then send a pull request to the source-of-truth > github > > >> repo. That way others could comment on the pending commit before it > was > > >> pulled in. Pulling it in could be done with a single click by someone > > with > > >> write privileges. > > >> > > >> Now, though, our source-of-truth is *not* on github, but on a git repo > > >> hosted by Apache. It's only mirrored to github in a read-only manner. > > Plus, > > >> it may be lagging behind the source-of-truth repo. > > >> > > >> What's the best, recommended methodology and ui to use for getting > > feedback > > >> pre-commit? > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> James > > > > -- > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity > to > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > that > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender > immediately > > and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > >
