More on github patching On GitHub, a request to make a patch, or "pull" in code automatically creates an issue ticket. The pull request/patch can be discussed. This means the the discussion, patch, and commit pointer are all found at a single URL.
Additionally, individuals can be reference and linked in the conversation using the "@username" convention. Any use of @gregelin immediately includes that comment in my Github notification feed and emails me. Email is very convenient and feels intimate among a tight community. After working at a federal agency and seeing how much work was done inside of email and effectively made obscure (if not invisible) to the rest of the enterprise, I much prefer discussions that aggregate at a single URL. Greg Greg Elin P: 917-304-3488 E: [email protected] Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 9, 2014, at 9:08 AM, Trevor Vaughan <[email protected]> wrote: > > Absolutely! > > So, patch reviews are made easier by the following: > > GitHub > > 1) Syntax highlighting > 2) Inline commenting that persists over time > 3) Immediate tracing of tickets to code via hashtags > 4) Notification of individuals and groups via directed responses (@) > 5) Easy raw file downloads > > Gerrit > > 1) Syntax highlighting > 2) Inline commenting that persists over time > 3) Forced clean history based on Gerrit rules > 4) Complete tracking of revision history (GitHub doesn't give you this) > 5) Ability to restore abandoned changes if necessary > 6) Authoritative, uncorruptable (unless you allow direct pushing) repository. > > If I remember correctly, FedoraHosted will not use any product not packaged > with RHEL/Fedora and Gerrit proved to be too difficult to package for > whatever reason. > > There is another Gerrit-like system that the FedoraHosted systems can use but > I didn't find it to be as powerful as Gerrit when I last tried to use it. > > Thanks, > > Trevor > > >> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:05 AM, Jan Lieskovsky <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hello Trevor, >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Trevor Vaughan" >> > Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2014 2:12:52 AM >> > >> > Honestly +1 here. >> > >> > I have pretty much all of my repos hosted under Github and their patch and >> > review process is *easy* >> >> Can you be more specific what makes that patch review process easy? Anything >> else behind having the patch review handled via Gerrit? >> >> > particularly when combined with the new Gerrit >> > system that's free for FOSS projects. >> >> So would just request Gerrit instance for SSG project via the Fedora >> infrastructure >> solve our obstacles? [*] >> >> Thank you && Regards, Jan. >> -- >> Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Technologies Team >> >> [*] You to understand I am not against moving to GitHub. Just trying to >> identify >> the difference / advantages / improvements, and if some of them would be >> doable without the move to GitHub (less requirements for the time / >> resources >> wrt to actions related with the move) >> >> > >> > Trevor >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Ronald < [email protected] > wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi there, >> > >> > from a personal perspective, as a github users (read biased opinion), I've >> > been refrained from contributing and publishing diffs because: >> > - the process of patch approval was not clear, >> > - communication around a patch is made difficult by mail (which are already >> > follinwg throughout the days) >> > - current open issues are not listed and cannot be discussed by the >> > community >> > (to propose patch for instance) >> > >> > I have the feeling that a move to github would make lots of things clear >> > for >> > global collaboration. Although, the fact that the project is hosted at >> > fedora is a good quality stamp/branding :) >> > >> > my two cents. >> > >> > Ronald >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Shawn Wells < [email protected] > wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On 4/8/14, 10:16 AM, Trevor Vaughan wrote: >> > >> > >> > Just out of curiosity, what happened with this in the end? >> > >> > I just noticed a few more suggestions that Github-style pull requests would >> > be really useful. >> > >> > There were valid opinions expressed for both staying on FedoraHosted and >> > migrating to GitHub. So, effectively, a stalemate. >> > >> > The SSG community has grown amazingly -- both in contributors and usage -- >> > and because of this success Red Hat is preparing to ship SSG in future >> > versions of RHEL [1]. This exacerbates the need for a manageable ticketing >> > system with easy patch submission as very shortly every RHEL installation >> > will have a copy of SSG. FedoraHosted simply wasn't designed to include the >> > same tooling and developer ecosystem as afforded on GitHub (and that's NOT >> > a >> > ding against it's designers!). >> > >> > The community is a coalition of the willing. Our shared purpose drives the >> > community, and I strongly feel the need to build out tools that will allow >> > us to scale. I'm concerned -- likely overly so -- at how to prepare for a >> > wave of interest once we begin shipping in RHEL. >> > >> > With that said, who am I to *mandate* the migration to GitHub? Admittedly >> > part of me wants to just go ahead and do it, however that could come at >> > making a non-trivial amount of people (esp. committers, who would be >> > effected by the change) feel alienated/ignored. Certainly we can't make >> > everyone happy all the time, though. >> > >> > Thoughts would be *most* welcome. >> > >> > >> > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ show_bug.cgi?id=1038655 >> > >> > >> > ______________________________ _________________ >> > scap-security-guide mailing list >> > scap-security-guide@lists. fedorahosted.org >> > https://lists.fedorahosted. org/mailman/listinfo/scap- security-guide >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > scap-security-guide mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Trevor Vaughan >> > Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc >> > (410) 541-6699 >> > [email protected] >> > >> > -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information -- >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > scap-security-guide mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide >> > > > > > -- > Trevor Vaughan > Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc > (410) 541-6699 > [email protected] > > -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information -- > _______________________________________________ > scap-security-guide mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide
_______________________________________________ scap-security-guide mailing list [email protected] https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide
