> On Mar 1, 2018, at 10:40 PM, Karl Rupp <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey, > >> I think people who are integrators should be responsible for their own >> pull requests. > > yes, agreed, that's the most efficient way. > > Still, the majority of open PRs is from developers who are not integrators. > These are the ones that tend to hang around for too long.
Yes, we need mechanisms to move these through efficiently. > > Best regards, > Karli But I've found people often neglect their own pull requests. Maybe we need to set up a system that sends nagging emails regularly about out-standing requests. > > > > >>> On Mar 1, 2018, at 5:33 AM, Karl Rupp <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Dear PETSc folks, >>> >>> I think we can do a better job when it comes to handling pull requests >>> (PRs). We have several PRs piling up, which after some time (imho) get >>> merged relatively carelessly instead of reaping the full benefits of a >>> thorough review. >>> >>> In order to improve the integration of pull requests, I propose to nominate >>> a PR integrator, who is a-priori responsible for *all* incoming PRs. The PR >>> integrator is free to delegate a particular PR integration to someone with >>> the relevant domain-specific knowledge (e.g. Matt for DMPlex-related >>> things) by appropriate comments on Bitbucket. In case of delays, the PR >>> integrator is also responsible for issuing reminders over time (like Barry >>> has done in the past). >>> >>> The idea is to make daily progress with the PRs. One integration step per >>> day (e.g. testing or merging to next) is presumably enough to handle the >>> load, whereas things get messy if we let things pile up. Automated testing >>> may help a bit in the future, but it doesn't release us from properly >>> reviewing the contributed code. >>> >>> Any objections to my PR integrator proposal? Any volunteers? ;-) >>> If nobody else wants to be the highly esteemed PR integrator, I can do it. >>> ;-) >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Karli
