Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

+1 to Kenneth proposal, using reviewer and asignee, for the merge strategy (a) +1 with the same arguments (preserving commits when they are meaningful and isolated, ask committers to do extra squash if needed. I don't really favor having one big commit per PR (in particular if the change is big)

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

I think I agree with Kenn on the "merge question": - There should be a merge commit because this records important information, for example, I like having the option of figuring out what PR certain commits came from - Individual meaningful commits of a PR should be preserved, I think having

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

Hi, I don't see why gitbox merge button change what we are doing. I agree with Kenn for 1 (reviewer field) & 2 (assignee field). IMHO, for 3, I think the reviewer should only use rebase & merge. The squash should be under the contributor scope. The reviewer can ask to squash some commits,

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

Let's assume that when I say (a) the author has arranged commits to be meaningful. That's what I meant to say in each of my descriptions of the option. If they are noise, it doesn't apply. On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:04 PM, James wrote: > Thanks Kenn for bring up this

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

Thanks Kenn for bring up this expanded discussion, my vote is: (a) -1 this preserves noise log like 'fix review comments' (b) +0 this keeps the commit log clean, but without a rebase (c) -1 similar to option a), it preserves noise log like 'fix review comments' My ideal option is the current

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Raghu Angadi wrote: > -1 for (a): no need to see all the private branch commits from > contributor. It often makes me more conscious of local commits. > I want to note that on my PRs these are not private commits. Each one is a meaningful

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

-1 for (a): no need to see all the private branch commits from contributor. It often makes me more conscious of local commits. +1 for (b): with committer replacing the squashed commit messages with '[BEAM-jira or PRID]: Brief cut-n-paste (or longer if it contributor provided one)'. -1 for (c):

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

Is it possible for mergebot to auto squash any fixup! and perform the merge commit as described in (a), if so then I would vote for mergebot. Without mergebot, I vote: (a) 0 I like squashing fixup! (b) -1 (c) +1 Most of our PRs are for focused singular changes which is why I would rather squash

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Ben Chambers wrote: > One risk to "squash and merge" is that it may lead to commits that don't > have clean descriptions -- for instance, commits like "Fixing review > comments" will show up. If we use (a) these would also show up as

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

I am strongly in favor of (1); I have no strong feelings about (2); I agree on (3), but generically am not hugely concerned, so long as back-references to the original PR are maintained, which is where most of the context lives. It is nice to have the change broken up into as many individually

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

One risk to "squash and merge" is that it may lead to commits that don't have clean descriptions -- for instance, commits like "Fixing review comments" will show up. If we use (a) these would also show up as separate commits. It seems like there are two cases of multiple commits in a PR: 1.

Re: [DISCUSS] Updating contribution guide for gitbox

Hi, In other Apache projects using gitbox, I experiment, the following cinematic: 1. use the review button to assign someone 2. once changes approved, I use the merge button (supporting squash and merge) It's very convenient and works fine. So, +1 to (b) Regards JB On 11/28/2017 06:45 PM,