We'll add jira numbers along with each commit (my view was that it was not necessary with the clear separation and non-fastforward merges, but no problem for adapting!).
About jira/git hooks, I have the impression it's not an option: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4157 Matthieu On Jan 21, 2013, at 20:09 , kishore g wrote: > I like that approach of adding the JIRA number to each commit. One thing i > noticed was that the commit summary does not get updated on the JIRA. Is > there any thing we need to do any commit hook or its supposed happen > automatically? > > thanks, > Kishore G > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Karthik Kambatla > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> My bad. Just saw my +1 and discussion on that JIRA :) >> >> Can we augment our process to add JIRA number to each commit in the JIRA >> branch? >> >> Thanks >> Karthik >> >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Matthieu Morel <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> We have a slightly different approach, in which we integrate patches in >>> separate branches. Branches are named by the jira number. See >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/S4-35 >>> >>> We then merge without fast forward, which allows a clear understanding of >>> commits vs tickets. >>> >>> This works quite well, but we can update the process if needed of course. >>> >>> Matthieu >>> >>> >>> On Jan 21, 2013, at 19:43 , Karthik Kambatla wrote: >>> >>>> Hello team, >>>> >>>> Firstly, great progress on performance, new features and bug fixes, >>> mainly >>>> thanks to Matthieu, Daniel, Aimee, and Kishore. >>>> >>>> I was just trying to catch up with the changes int he recent past, and >>> felt >>>> it would really help if we could annotate the commits with JIRA numbers >>> so >>>> that one could track the discussion/reasoning behind a particular >>> approach. >>>> Found these annotations really helpful on Apache Hadoop, and think we >>>> should definitely consider. Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Karthik >>> >>> >>
