Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

2022-07-16 Thread Ed Merks

Thanks guys, that was the information I was looking for!

FYI, EGit has this cool plugin, which is independent from Mylyn, that 
could be reused to do all kinds of very nice Github integration.  I've 
been playing with it a bit already.  E.g., I wanted to be able to create 
a remote to a fork if one has a fork for the clone...


On 16.07.2022 11:45, Christoph Läubrich wrote:
Please don't complicate that too much, the data is all there so 
instead of duplicate it better enhance the tools than enhancing the 
usual developer or require complex commit_hooks (this has not worked 
well for gerrit either) ...


One don't needs the GH API for that, as "fetch PR" do not needs the 
github API either... it all should be recoverable from the git-data + 
some filling into a template that makes up a full link.


So if we have found out that the commit is part of 'origin/pull/123' 
it should not be so hard to display a link


https://github.com//pull/123

...

Am 16.07.22 um 11:38 schrieb Hannes Wellmann:
Like the others I'm in favor to not require an issue for each 
non-trivial PR. There are good reasons to create an issue, e.g. you 
don't want to work on it (now) or want to discuss the solution first. 
But if one already has implemented a (draft) solution a requirement 
to create a dedicated issue just feels like extra ceremony that 
causes noise and extra work.

Regarding Ed's remark:
As Christoph showed you can find the PR of a commit via the GitHub UI.
Besides that we could use an enhanced merge-procedure to 
automatically append the link to the PR (and maybe the reviewers 
etc.) just like it was done in Gerrit [1].
This was already suggested on other mailing lists and I asked about 
that at the community meeting in June. Jonah Graham pointed there to 
the GitHub UI way mentioned by Christoph.
While the GH-UI offers a way to find the PR, embedding a link in the 
commit message is probably the most universal way that does not 
require more magic in EGit or at other places.
In the end such magic probably would require to log-in to GitHub 
within Eclipse because for most interactions with the GH API one 
needs an authentication. I think we should avoid that if possible. 
Not everybody has a GH account and for me it would feel odd to have 
to enter a log-in to my local Eclipse.

Greetings
Hannes
[1] - 
https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/15d4491246a0bc3eb19f874a4cd2774a1bdc2269

*Gesendet:* Samstag, 16. Juli 2022 um 11:13 Uhr
*Von:* "Christoph Läubrich" 
*An:* [email protected]
*Betreff:* Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub
Hi Ed,

I think I noted it somewhere else already:

1) the PR that merged the commit is recorded and github also shows that
information as you already found out
2) the magic is described here [1] there is even a script for that [2])
3) But EGit currently do not offer anything to make this "magic" visible
in the UI

[1]https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17818167/find-a-pull-request-on-github-where-a-commit-was-originally-created 
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17818167/find-a-pull-request-on-github-where-a-commit-was-originally-created> 

[2] http://joey.aghion.com/find-the-github-pull-request-for-a-commit/ 
<http://joey.aghion.com/find-the-github-pull-request-for-a-commit/>


Am 16.07.22 um 10:55 schrieb Ed Merks:
 > Of course making everyone efficient is an important goal!   I 
think it's

 > also an important goal to preserve historical information, especially
 > around discussions with respect to design decisions.  From that 
point of
 > view,  I wonder, does each PR-only commit really have a link back 
to the PR?

 >
 > I look at this commit and I see no such link(s):
 >
 > I don't see such a link from here either.:
 >
 > 
https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/36b87ff2d4a4192fc9baa1fafa970a966464f506 
<https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/36b87ff2d4a4192fc9baa1fafa970a966464f506> 


 >
 > Contrast that to this commit which has links:
 >
 > And from here one can navigate those links:
 >
 > 
https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/c9e687a44805f1fb26e422d25a1982f74291bffd 
<https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/c9e687a44805f1fb26e422d25a1982f74291bffd> 


 >
 > So it seems to me that yes a PR is much like an Issue, but without 
links
 > to one or both in the commit itself, it's just a commit and one 
cannot

 > find out any historical information discussions and design decisions
 > that were made relative to that commit.  I expect that information is
 > useful and has gone missing.  Or did I overlook something that such
 > links at least to the PR are implicitly navigable somewhere?
 >
 > On 15.07.2022 12:53, Mickael Istria wrote:
 >> Hi Vikas,
 >>
 >> Like Lars, I'm also unsure adding more tickets and bureaucrac

Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

2022-07-16 Thread Christoph Läubrich
Please don't complicate that too much, the data is all there so instead 
of duplicate it better enhance the tools than enhancing the usual 
developer or require complex commit_hooks (this has not worked well for 
gerrit either) ...


One don't needs the GH API for that, as "fetch PR" do not needs the 
github API either... it all should be recoverable from the git-data + 
some filling into a template that makes up a full link.


So if we have found out that the commit is part of 'origin/pull/123' it 
should not be so hard to display a link


https://github.com//pull/123

...

Am 16.07.22 um 11:38 schrieb Hannes Wellmann:
Like the others I'm in favor to not require an issue for each 
non-trivial PR. There are good reasons to create an issue, e.g. you 
don't want to work on it (now) or want to discuss the solution first. 
But if one already has implemented a (draft) solution a requirement to 
create a dedicated issue just feels like extra ceremony that causes 
noise and extra work.

Regarding Ed's remark:
As Christoph showed you can find the PR of a commit via the GitHub UI.
Besides that we could use an enhanced merge-procedure to automatically 
append the link to the PR (and maybe the reviewers etc.) just like it 
was done in Gerrit [1].
This was already suggested on other mailing lists and I asked about that 
at the community meeting in June. Jonah Graham pointed there to the 
GitHub UI way mentioned by Christoph.
While the GH-UI offers a way to find the PR, embedding a link in the 
commit message is probably the most universal way that does not require 
more magic in EGit or at other places.
In the end such magic probably would require to log-in to GitHub within 
Eclipse because for most interactions with the GH API one needs an 
authentication. I think we should avoid that if possible. Not everybody 
has a GH account and for me it would feel odd to have to enter a log-in 
to my local Eclipse.

Greetings
Hannes
[1] - 
https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/15d4491246a0bc3eb19f874a4cd2774a1bdc2269

*Gesendet:* Samstag, 16. Juli 2022 um 11:13 Uhr
*Von:* "Christoph Läubrich" 
*An:* [email protected]
*Betreff:* Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub
Hi Ed,

I think I noted it somewhere else already:

1) the PR that merged the commit is recorded and github also shows that
information as you already found out
2) the magic is described here [1] there is even a script for that [2])
3) But EGit currently do not offer anything to make this "magic" visible
in the UI

[1]https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17818167/find-a-pull-request-on-github-where-a-commit-was-originally-created 
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17818167/find-a-pull-request-on-github-where-a-commit-was-originally-created>
[2] http://joey.aghion.com/find-the-github-pull-request-for-a-commit/ 
<http://joey.aghion.com/find-the-github-pull-request-for-a-commit/>


Am 16.07.22 um 10:55 schrieb Ed Merks:
 > Of course making everyone efficient is an important goal!   I think it's
 > also an important goal to preserve historical information, especially
 > around discussions with respect to design decisions.  From that point of
 > view,  I wonder, does each PR-only commit really have a link back to 
the PR?

 >
 > I look at this commit and I see no such link(s):
 >
 > I don't see such a link from here either.:
 >
 > 
https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/36b87ff2d4a4192fc9baa1fafa970a966464f506 
<https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/36b87ff2d4a4192fc9baa1fafa970a966464f506>

 >
 > Contrast that to this commit which has links:
 >
 > And from here one can navigate those links:
 >
 > 
https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/c9e687a44805f1fb26e422d25a1982f74291bffd 
<https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/c9e687a44805f1fb26e422d25a1982f74291bffd>

 >
 > So it seems to me that yes a PR is much like an Issue, but without links
 > to one or both in the commit itself, it's just a commit and one cannot
 > find out any historical information discussions and design decisions
 > that were made relative to that commit.  I expect that information is
 > useful and has gone missing.  Or did I overlook something that such
 > links at least to the PR are implicitly navigable somewhere?
 >
 > On 15.07.2022 12:53, Mickael Istria wrote:
 >> Hi Vikas,
 >>
 >> Like Lars, I'm also unsure adding more tickets and bureaucracy as a
 >> requirement will help the committers in being more efficient.
 >> Can you please explain the current problems that you or others face
 >> with tracking in the current state? Maybe we can find some tricks (eg
 >> GitHub queries) to satisfy you needs without requiring an issue for
 >> every PR if the contributor didn't reporting an issue a-priori w

Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

2022-07-16 Thread Hannes Wellmann
Like the others I'm in favor to not require an issue for each non-trivial PR. There are good reasons to create an issue, e.g. you don't want to work on it (now) or want to discuss the solution first. But if one already has implemented a (draft) solution a requirement to create a dedicated issue just feels like extra ceremony that causes noise and extra work.

 

Regarding Ed's remark:

As Christoph showed you can find the PR of a commit via the GitHub UI.

Besides that we could use an enhanced merge-procedure to automatically append the link to the PR (and maybe the reviewers etc.) just like it was done in Gerrit [1].

This was already suggested on other mailing lists and I asked about that at the community meeting in June. Jonah Graham pointed there to the GitHub UI way mentioned by Christoph.

While the GH-UI offers a way to find the PR, embedding a link in the commit message is probably the most universal way that does not require more magic in EGit or at other places.

In the end such magic probably would require to log-in to GitHub within Eclipse because for most interactions with the GH API one needs an authentication. I think we should avoid that if possible. Not everybody has a GH account and for me it would feel odd to have to enter a log-in to my local Eclipse.

 

Greetings

Hannes

 

[1] - https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/15d4491246a0bc3eb19f874a4cd2774a1bdc2269

 
 

Gesendet: Samstag, 16. Juli 2022 um 11:13 Uhr
Von: "Christoph Läubrich" 
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

Hi Ed,

I think I noted it somewhere else already:

1) the PR that merged the commit is recorded and github also shows that
information as you already found out
2) the magic is described here [1] there is even a script for that [2])
3) But EGit currently do not offer anything to make this "magic" visible
in the UI

[1]https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17818167/find-a-pull-request-on-github-where-a-commit-was-originally-created
[2] http://joey.aghion.com/find-the-github-pull-request-for-a-commit/

Am 16.07.22 um 10:55 schrieb Ed Merks:
> Of course making everyone efficient is an important goal!   I think it's
> also an important goal to preserve historical information, especially
> around discussions with respect to design decisions.  From that point of
> view,  I wonder, does each PR-only commit really have a link back to the PR?
>
> I look at this commit and I see no such link(s):
>
> I don't see such a link from here either.:
>
> https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/36b87ff2d4a4192fc9baa1fafa970a966464f506
>
> Contrast that to this commit which has links:
>
> And from here one can navigate those links:
>
> https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/c9e687a44805f1fb26e422d25a1982f74291bffd
>
> So it seems to me that yes a PR is much like an Issue, but without links
> to one or both in the commit itself, it's just a commit and one cannot
> find out any historical information discussions and design decisions
> that were made relative to that commit.  I expect that information is
> useful and has gone missing.  Or did I overlook something that such
> links at least to the PR are implicitly navigable somewhere?
>
> On 15.07.2022 12:53, Mickael Istria wrote:
>> Hi Vikas,
>>
>> Like Lars, I'm also unsure adding more tickets and bureaucracy as a
>> requirement will help the committers in being more efficient.
>> Can you please explain the current problems that you or others face
>> with tracking in the current state? Maybe we can find some tricks (eg
>> GitHub queries) to satisfy you needs without requiring an issue for
>> every PR if the contributor didn't reporting an issue a-priori was useful.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> ___
>> platform-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
>
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev




 

 
___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev


Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

2022-07-16 Thread Christoph Läubrich

Hi Ed,

I think I noted it somewhere else already:

1) the PR that merged the commit is recorded and github also shows that 
information as you already found out

2) the magic is described here [1] there is even a script for that [2])
3) But EGit currently do not offer anything to make this "magic" visible 
in the UI


[1]https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17818167/find-a-pull-request-on-github-where-a-commit-was-originally-created
[2] http://joey.aghion.com/find-the-github-pull-request-for-a-commit/

Am 16.07.22 um 10:55 schrieb Ed Merks:
Of course making everyone efficient is an important goal!   I think it's 
also an important goal to preserve historical information, especially 
around discussions with respect to design decisions.  From that point of 
view,  I wonder, does each PR-only commit really have a link back to the PR?


I look at this commit and I see no such link(s):

I don't see such a link from here either.:

https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/36b87ff2d4a4192fc9baa1fafa970a966464f506

Contrast that to this commit which has links:

And from here one can navigate those links:

https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/c9e687a44805f1fb26e422d25a1982f74291bffd

So it seems to me that yes a PR is much like an Issue, but without links 
to one or both in the commit itself, it's just a commit and one cannot 
find out any historical information discussions and design decisions 
that were made relative to that commit.  I expect that information is 
useful and has gone missing.  Or did I overlook something that such 
links at least to the PR are implicitly navigable somewhere?


On 15.07.2022 12:53, Mickael Istria wrote:

Hi Vikas,

Like Lars, I'm also unsure adding more tickets and bureaucracy as a 
requirement will help the committers in being more efficient.
Can you please explain the current problems that you or others face 
with tracking in the current state? Maybe we can find some tricks (eg 
GitHub queries) to satisfy you needs without requiring an issue for 
every PR if the contributor didn't reporting an issue a-priori was useful.


Cheers

___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, 
visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev


___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev


Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

2022-07-16 Thread Ed Merks
Of course making everyone efficient is an important goal!   I think it's 
also an important goal to preserve historical information, especially 
around discussions with respect to design decisions.  From that point of 
view,  I wonder, does each PR-only commit really have a link back to the PR?


I look at this commit and I see no such link(s):

I don't see such a link from here either.:

https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/36b87ff2d4a4192fc9baa1fafa970a966464f506

Contrast that to this commit which has links:

And from here one can navigate those links:

https://github.com/eclipse-pde/eclipse.pde/commit/c9e687a44805f1fb26e422d25a1982f74291bffd

So it seems to me that yes a PR is much like an Issue, but without links 
to one or both in the commit itself, it's just a commit and one cannot 
find out any historical information discussions and design decisions 
that were made relative to that commit.  I expect that information is 
useful and has gone missing.  Or did I overlook something that such 
links at least to the PR are implicitly navigable somewhere?


On 15.07.2022 12:53, Mickael Istria wrote:

Hi Vikas,

Like Lars, I'm also unsure adding more tickets and bureaucracy as a 
requirement will help the committers in being more efficient.
Can you please explain the current problems that you or others face 
with tracking in the current state? Maybe we can find some tricks (eg 
GitHub queries) to satisfy you needs without requiring an issue for 
every PR if the contributor didn't reporting an issue a-priori was useful.


Cheers

___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, 
visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev


Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

2022-07-15 Thread Mickael Istria
Hi Vikas,

Like Lars, I'm also unsure adding more tickets and bureaucracy as a
requirement will help the committers in being more efficient.
Can you please explain the current problems that you or others face with
tracking in the current state? Maybe we can find some tricks (eg GitHub
queries) to satisfy you needs without requiring an issue for every PR if
the contributor didn't reporting an issue a-priori was useful.

Cheers
___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev


Re: [platform-dev] [pde-dev] PDE and GitHub

2022-07-15 Thread Lars Vogel
-1 from me for the requirement to create an issue. PR and issues are
basically the same, so we could not gain anything by having the
requirement to create one.

I don't mind using milestone tags but also do not see value in this,
we could use git shortlog milestoneref1 milestoneref2 to get the
commits.


On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 5:53 AM Vikas Chandra  wrote:
>
> Hello PDE committers and contributors,
>
>
>
> Thanks for all your contributions/commits. I am happy to see PDE as one of 
> the most active repos these days. However
>
> few things are missing post migration to GitHub.
>
>
>
> Ever since we have moved to GitHub, we are missing some of the old actions 
> that helped in better testing, bug tracking, finding
>
> commits that causes issue etc, identifying nice features and bugs in a 
> milestone or over last few weeks.
>
>
>
> For PDE, this is what I propose
>
>
>
> It is recommended that all non-trivial changes should have a corresponding 
> issue ( exceptions are cleanup, typo, releng, formatting, comparator issue, 
> version change etc). Basically any change that changes the behaviour of 
> eclipse should be tracked by an issue.
>
>
>
> All PRs without an issue should compulsorily  have “milestone” and “assignee” 
> set in the PR.
>
>
>
> Enhancement and noteworthy items should compulsorily have a corresponding 
> issue and enhancement/noteworthy label should be put. In case of regression, 
> we must put regression label.
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> Vikas
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> ___
> pde-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/pde-dev



-- 
Eclipse Platform project co-lead
CEO vogella GmbH

Haindaalwisch 17a, 22395 Hamburg
Amtsgericht Hamburg: HRB 127058
Geschäftsführer: Lars Vogel, Jennifer Nerlich de Vogel
USt-IdNr.: DE284122352
Fax (040) 5247 6322, Email: [email protected], Web: http://www.vogella.com
___
platform-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev