Re: All Github PR closed

[Donald Szeto]

>
> > BTW Here are the Mahout instructions:
> http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html this would need to be
> modified to use the “develop” branch strategy. It seems less than ideal but
> is actually pretty easy in practice and much better than the purely Jira +
> patch file method.
>

+1.

Re: All Github PR closed

[Andrew Purtell]

> How do we reopen those PRs that were automatically closed? Can we committers 
> do that or should we ask the user to resubmit against the moved repo?

If someone already on the org can't reopen we could ask infra to do it I 
suspect. 


> On Jul 4, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
> 
> Yes, exactly what I was trying to explain. BTW even if I liked Jira and patch 
> files, contributors have spoken in other projects and are far more likely to 
> use a github PR when allowed to. How do we reopen those PRs that were 
> automatically closed? Can we committers do that or should we ask the user to 
> resubmit against the moved repo?
> 
> I ask because a couple seem to match Jira’s already filed.
> 
> We need a standard process for commit and contribute reviews and I’d propose 
> the Github integration approach Andy mentions. Basically all non-trivial 
> commits start as a Github PR, they are reviewed there and a committer 
> eventually merges and pushes to Apache git. All conversation on github is 
> mirrored to Jira for Apache records. 
> 
> BTW Here are the Mahout instructions: 
> http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html this would need to be 
> modified to use the “develop” branch strategy. It seems less than ideal but 
> is actually pretty easy in practice and much better than the purely Jira + 
> patch file method.
> 
> On Jul 4, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Andrew Purtell  wrote:
> 
> It's up to you if you want to use JIRA or PRs. Just be aware that nothing on 
> GitHub can be considered canonical at this time. So indeed that means if 
> using only PRs then the Apache side archive of emails from the PR is the only 
> official record. Also, the penultimate commit must be made into the Apache 
> repository, so you can't use the merge button. 
> 
> If a JIRA is opened first and the PR references the issue identifier in the 
> title then the GitHub integration will auto post PR activity to JIRA, for 
> what it's worth. It's not ideal perhaps but does integrate the two so you and 
> your contributors can utilize either option without a process disconnect. 
> That option is used by several projects I work on. 
> 
> 
>> On Jul 4, 2016, at 10:35 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>> 
>> Creating a Jira for a PR is all well and fine but using pathces + Jira is a 
>> pretty archaic and cumbersome way to handle PRs. If we simply reopen the PR 
>> against the mirror github repo then all conversations there can be sent to 
>> dev@ and once the PR is in good shape the committer shepherding the PR can 
>> merge from the contributors branch and push to Apache git. No shiny green 
>> github merge button but pretty straight-forward.
>> 
>> This is the way we do it in Mahout. It makes best use of Github’s code 
>> review GUI and PRs. I think it is similar to Spark since we didn’t invent 
>> this method. It is also supported by infra.
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 1, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
>> 
>> Definitely moving to JIRA. We just want to explain to the community why
>> they are closed, since some of them asked.
>> 
>>> On Friday, July 1, 2016, Andrew Purtell  wrote:
>>> 
>>> What about moving all of those PRs, and their changes (as patch) to the new
>>> PIO JIRA instance?
>>> 
>>> There is some discussion about allowing GH Issues as a blessed resource for
>>> development workflow, but we are not there yet where there is guidance for
>>> podlings (or even TLPs).
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Pat Ferrel >> > wrote:
>>> 
 The way Mahout works is that committers can open or close PRs (though a
 github merge will fail). But I can’t re-poen these PRs. That would be an
 easy solution, right? Maybe someone just needs to grant us certain github
 permissions?
 
> On Jun 30, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Donald Szeto > wrote:
 
 But not all PRs are closed, so it left me wondering if there is a set of
 conditions that were triggered when GitHub integration was turned on.
 
> On Thursday, June 30, 2016, Pat Ferrel > wrote:
 
> Maybe I missed the explanation but why are all the gitub PRs against
>>> the
> PIO account closed? This is not ideas, especially if some should be
 merged
> with the ASF git, because the PRs have user/branch info that can be
>>> used
 to
> hand-merge.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> - Andy
>>> 
>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>>> (via Tom White)
> 

Re: All Github PR closed

[Pat Ferrel]

Yes, exactly what I was trying to explain. BTW even if I liked Jira and patch 
files, contributors have spoken in other projects and are far more likely to 
use a github PR when allowed to. How do we reopen those PRs that were 
automatically closed? Can we committers do that or should we ask the user to 
resubmit against the moved repo?

I ask because a couple seem to match Jira’s already filed.

We need a standard process for commit and contribute reviews and I’d propose 
the Github integration approach Andy mentions. Basically all non-trivial 
commits start as a Github PR, they are reviewed there and a committer 
eventually merges and pushes to Apache git. All conversation on github is 
mirrored to Jira for Apache records. 

BTW Here are the Mahout instructions: 
http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html this would need to be modified 
to use the “develop” branch strategy. It seems less than ideal but is actually 
pretty easy in practice and much better than the purely Jira + patch file 
method.

On Jul 4, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Andrew Purtell  wrote:

It's up to you if you want to use JIRA or PRs. Just be aware that nothing on 
GitHub can be considered canonical at this time. So indeed that means if using 
only PRs then the Apache side archive of emails from the PR is the only 
official record. Also, the penultimate commit must be made into the Apache 
repository, so you can't use the merge button. 

If a JIRA is opened first and the PR references the issue identifier in the 
title then the GitHub integration will auto post PR activity to JIRA, for what 
it's worth. It's not ideal perhaps but does integrate the two so you and your 
contributors can utilize either option without a process disconnect. That 
option is used by several projects I work on. 


> On Jul 4, 2016, at 10:35 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
> 
> Creating a Jira for a PR is all well and fine but using pathces + Jira is a 
> pretty archaic and cumbersome way to handle PRs. If we simply reopen the PR 
> against the mirror github repo then all conversations there can be sent to 
> dev@ and once the PR is in good shape the committer shepherding the PR can 
> merge from the contributors branch and push to Apache git. No shiny green 
> github merge button but pretty straight-forward.
> 
> This is the way we do it in Mahout. It makes best use of Github’s code review 
> GUI and PRs. I think it is similar to Spark since we didn’t invent this 
> method. It is also supported by infra.
> 
> 
> On Jul 1, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
> 
> Definitely moving to JIRA. We just want to explain to the community why
> they are closed, since some of them asked.
> 
>> On Friday, July 1, 2016, Andrew Purtell  wrote:
>> 
>> What about moving all of those PRs, and their changes (as patch) to the new
>> PIO JIRA instance?
>> 
>> There is some discussion about allowing GH Issues as a blessed resource for
>> development workflow, but we are not there yet where there is guidance for
>> podlings (or even TLPs).
>> 
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Pat Ferrel > > wrote:
>> 
>>> The way Mahout works is that committers can open or close PRs (though a
>>> github merge will fail). But I can’t re-poen these PRs. That would be an
>>> easy solution, right? Maybe someone just needs to grant us certain github
>>> permissions?
>>> 
 On Jun 30, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Donald Szeto >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> But not all PRs are closed, so it left me wondering if there is a set of
>>> conditions that were triggered when GitHub integration was turned on.
>>> 
 On Thursday, June 30, 2016, Pat Ferrel >> > wrote:
>>> 
 Maybe I missed the explanation but why are all the gitub PRs against
>> the
 PIO account closed? This is not ideas, especially if some should be
>>> merged
 with the ASF git, because the PRs have user/branch info that can be
>> used
>>> to
 hand-merge.
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> - Andy
>> 
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
> 

Re: All Github PR closed

[Pat Ferrel]

The way Mahout works is that committers can open or close PRs (though a github 
merge will fail). But I can’t re-poen these PRs. That would be an easy 
solution, right? Maybe someone just needs to grant us certain github 
permissions?

On Jun 30, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:

But not all PRs are closed, so it left me wondering if there is a set of
conditions that were triggered when GitHub integration was turned on.

On Thursday, June 30, 2016, Pat Ferrel  wrote:

> Maybe I missed the explanation but why are all the gitub PRs against the
> PIO account closed? This is not ideas, especially if some should be merged
> with the ASF git, because the PRs have user/branch info that can be used to
> hand-merge.
> 
> 

Re: All Github PR closed

[Donald Szeto]

But not all PRs are closed, so it left me wondering if there is a set of
conditions that were triggered when GitHub integration was turned on.

On Thursday, June 30, 2016, Pat Ferrel  wrote:

> Maybe I missed the explanation but why are all the gitub PRs against the
> PIO account closed? This is not ideas, especially if some should be merged
> with the ASF git, because the PRs have user/branch info that can be used to
> hand-merge.
>
>