Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow
It's really fine to create backports, even of other people's commits, as long as you don't do it too early (and thus make it possible to forget to update backports in line with newer patch sets of the master commit and land inconsistent implementations to different release series) and don't mangle Change-Id and Author (and turn git history examination into an IT archaeology excercise). Nothing personal: I've seen the same mistakes done by many people, so I want to clarify why it's important. On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Bartlomiej Piotrowski bpiotrow...@mirantis.com wrote: I'll keep it in mind not to create unnecessary backports, although I really find it more convenient to do them once I submit changes to master for review. I apologize for [4], it indeed was wrong and it won't happen again. Regards, Bartłomiej On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Ryan Moe r...@mirantis.com wrote: Here are some examples of proposing changes prior to being merged in master [0][1][2][3][4]. [0] is a perfect example of why this isn't a good process. A change was proposed to stable/6.0 before master was merged, and now the change to master needs to be reworked based on review feedback. Premature backporting just creates unnecessary additional work. I'd also like to give a friendly reminder to make sure we maintain the Change-Id and author of any change we backport. The wiki [5] has also been updated to make this explicit. [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Ief8186006386af8ae7e40cffeeaeef5a5c0f3c70,n,z [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I4c94bb03501f4238ead2378cf504485b7d67b236,n,z [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Ic15a3bfb6238e4281b06aae0a3f9fe4abf96590d,n,z [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I7ab6dc2341821c3b82ef3d3ac63b64a5a9958fa9,n,z [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Iff947f0053577f19441c04101e5a35a7820e40a0,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/How_to_contribute#Backport_bugfixes_to_stable_release_series Thanks, Ryan On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 4:20 AM, Tomasz Napierala tnapier...@mirantis.com wrote: On 09 Mar 2015, at 18:21, Ryan Moe r...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and discouraging to contributors. Reasons for abandoning should be discussed on the review and/or in email before any action is taken. Hi Ryan, I was trying to find any examples, and the only one I see is: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/152674/ I spoke to Bogdan and he agreed it was not proper way to do it, but they were in a rush - I know, it does not explain anything really. Do you have any other examples? I’d like to clarify them Regards, -- Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala Sr. OpenStack Engineer tnapier...@mirantis.com __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Dmitry Borodaenko __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow
I'll keep it in mind not to create unnecessary backports, although I really find it more convenient to do them once I submit changes to master for review. I apologize for [4], it indeed was wrong and it won't happen again. Regards, Bartłomiej On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Ryan Moe r...@mirantis.com wrote: Here are some examples of proposing changes prior to being merged in master [0][1][2][3][4]. [0] is a perfect example of why this isn't a good process. A change was proposed to stable/6.0 before master was merged, and now the change to master needs to be reworked based on review feedback. Premature backporting just creates unnecessary additional work. I'd also like to give a friendly reminder to make sure we maintain the Change-Id and author of any change we backport. The wiki [5] has also been updated to make this explicit. [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Ief8186006386af8ae7e40cffeeaeef5a5c0f3c70,n,z [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I4c94bb03501f4238ead2378cf504485b7d67b236,n,z [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Ic15a3bfb6238e4281b06aae0a3f9fe4abf96590d,n,z [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I7ab6dc2341821c3b82ef3d3ac63b64a5a9958fa9,n,z [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Iff947f0053577f19441c04101e5a35a7820e40a0,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/How_to_contribute#Backport_bugfixes_to_stable_release_series Thanks, Ryan On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 4:20 AM, Tomasz Napierala tnapier...@mirantis.com wrote: On 09 Mar 2015, at 18:21, Ryan Moe r...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and discouraging to contributors. Reasons for abandoning should be discussed on the review and/or in email before any action is taken. Hi Ryan, I was trying to find any examples, and the only one I see is: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/152674/ I spoke to Bogdan and he agreed it was not proper way to do it, but they were in a rush - I know, it does not explain anything really. Do you have any other examples? I’d like to clarify them Regards, -- Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala Sr. OpenStack Engineer tnapier...@mirantis.com __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow
On 09 Mar 2015, at 18:21, Ryan Moe r...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and discouraging to contributors. Reasons for abandoning should be discussed on the review and/or in email before any action is taken. Hi Ryan, I was trying to find any examples, and the only one I see is: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/152674/ I spoke to Bogdan and he agreed it was not proper way to do it, but they were in a rush - I know, it does not explain anything really. Do you have any other examples? I’d like to clarify them Regards, -- Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala Sr. OpenStack Engineer tnapier...@mirantis.com __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow
On 03/09/2015 06:21 PM, Ryan Moe wrote: Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and discouraging to contributors. Reasons for abandoning should be discussed on the review and/or in email before any action is taken. I would also like to talk about issues with our backporting procedure [0]. Over the past few weeks I've seen changes proposed to stable branches before the change in master was merged. This serves no purpose other than to increase our workload. We also run the risk of inconsistency between the same commit on master and stable branches. Please, do not propose backports until the change has been merged to master. [0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/How_to_contribute#Backport_bugfixes_to_stable_release_series Thanks, Ryan __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev Could we avoid beating around the bush and talk about exact examples of said behavior? Best regards, Bartłomiej __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow
Here are some examples of proposing changes prior to being merged in master [0][1][2][3][4]. [0] is a perfect example of why this isn't a good process. A change was proposed to stable/6.0 before master was merged, and now the change to master needs to be reworked based on review feedback. Premature backporting just creates unnecessary additional work. I'd also like to give a friendly reminder to make sure we maintain the Change-Id and author of any change we backport. The wiki [5] has also been updated to make this explicit. [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Ief8186006386af8ae7e40cffeeaeef5a5c0f3c70,n,z [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I4c94bb03501f4238ead2378cf504485b7d67b236,n,z [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Ic15a3bfb6238e4281b06aae0a3f9fe4abf96590d,n,z [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I7ab6dc2341821c3b82ef3d3ac63b64a5a9958fa9,n,z [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Iff947f0053577f19441c04101e5a35a7820e40a0,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/How_to_contribute#Backport_bugfixes_to_stable_release_series Thanks, Ryan On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 4:20 AM, Tomasz Napierala tnapier...@mirantis.com wrote: On 09 Mar 2015, at 18:21, Ryan Moe r...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and discouraging to contributors. Reasons for abandoning should be discussed on the review and/or in email before any action is taken. Hi Ryan, I was trying to find any examples, and the only one I see is: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/152674/ I spoke to Bogdan and he agreed it was not proper way to do it, but they were in a rush - I know, it does not explain anything really. Do you have any other examples? I’d like to clarify them Regards, -- Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala Sr. OpenStack Engineer tnapier...@mirantis.com __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow
Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and discouraging to contributors. Reasons for abandoning should be discussed on the review and/or in email before any action is taken. I would also like to talk about issues with our backporting procedure [0]. Over the past few weeks I've seen changes proposed to stable branches before the change in master was merged. This serves no purpose other than to increase our workload. We also run the risk of inconsistency between the same commit on master and stable branches. Please, do not propose backports until the change has been merged to master. [0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/How_to_contribute#Backport_bugfixes_to_stable_release_series Thanks, Ryan __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow
+1 on both points, Ryan. On 03/09/2015 01:21 PM, Ryan Moe wrote: Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and discouraging to contributors. Reasons for abandoning should be discussed on the review and/or in email before any action is taken. I would also like to talk about issues with our backporting procedure [0]. Over the past few weeks I've seen changes proposed to stable branches before the change in master was merged. This serves no purpose other than to increase our workload. We also run the risk of inconsistency between the same commit on master and stable branches. Please, do not propose backports until the change has been merged to master. [0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/How_to_contribute#Backport_bugfixes_to_stable_release_series Thanks, Ryan __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
