[Pulp-dev] [noissue] considered harmful

When we added commit validation to our CI, we created a loophole that would allow small changes like typo fixes to not have a redmine issue or changelog entry. By having '[noissue]' in the commit message, users could bypass our commit requirements. However, this loophole is not being used as

Re: [Pulp-dev] Solving the "callback problem" ... aka how pulpcore will stop finalizing RepositoryVersion

On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:01:07 -0500 Brian Bouterse wrote: Comment below. > Thank you for writing! > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 4:29 PM Matthias Dellweg > wrote: > > > Hi Brian, > > i like the the change in the code flow, but since the > > DeclarativeVersion (in your example) does not create the

Re: [Pulp-dev] [noissue] considered harmful

I'm leaning towards keeping [noissue] and have it a responsibility of PR reviewer/merger to evaluate if it's a proper use or an issue is needed. Alternatively, can we block a merge of PR if there is no issue? at github level, not in travis? so tests run but you can only merge it "using your admin

Re: [Pulp-dev] [Breaking Change] Typed Repositories

After much, great work from @dalley on the typed repository prototype, unfortunately, we believe it cannot be adopted at this time. Here's a writeup of why: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5625#note-8 and another writeup of alternatives considered: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5625#note-9 This

[Pulp-dev] Sprint 61 Planning minutes

Very late, but for the record. As discussed over IRC, we had planned to end the sprint Nov 12th and do sprint planning on the 13th, however teams will need to do some planning & clean up, so we'll end on the 13th and planning is moved to Nov 14th. 25-Oct-2019 2-week sprints. Sprint 60 Query

Re: [Pulp-dev] [noissue] considered harmful

Being a regular user of noissue, i think it is ok to keep it, if the reviewer can tell the contributer at some time that the change is effecting something worth noting in the changelog. Sometimes, what starts as a very small change evolves into something bigger. Sometimes you might even want to

Re: [Pulp-dev] Solving the "callback problem" ... aka how pulpcore will stop finalizing RepositoryVersion

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 5:01 PM Brian Bouterse wrote: > Thank you for writing! > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 4:29 PM Matthias Dellweg wrote: > >> Hi Brian, >> i like the the change in the code flow, but since the >> DeclarativeVersion (in your example) does not create the repository >> version

Re: [Pulp-dev] Solving the "callback problem" ... aka how pulpcore will stop finalizing RepositoryVersion

I've argued for removing the modify endpoint from core before we started addressing how to enable validation and I think it's generally a good idea. We already do this with other endpoints like sync so I don't think this would be a new precedent. Also, some plugins (for whatever reason) may not

Re: [Pulp-dev] Repo versions with no changes

+1 to not create empty repo versions for now On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 2:34 PM Fabricio Aguiar wrote: > Sounds good to me. > > Best regards, > Fabricio Aguiar > Software Engineer, Pulp Project > Red Hat Brazil - Latam > +55 11 999652368 > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:38

Re: [Pulp-dev] Repo versions with no changes

+1 to create a repo version only when there is content set change. Regards, Ina Panova Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. "Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 3:42 PM Tatiana Tereshchenko wrote:

Re: [Pulp-dev] [noissue] considered harmful

+1 reviewers watch out for it Dana Walker She / Her / Hers Software Engineer, Pulp Project Red Hat dawal...@redhat.com On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:04 PM Ina Panova wrote: > > +1 to keep [noissue] and reviewer keeps an eye whether an opened

Re: [Pulp-dev] [noissue] considered harmful

Agreed, I would also rather keep [noissue]. That is a good example of when it is useful. We can and should pay more attention to when it's being used in the PR review process, though. On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 12:26 PM Tatiana Tereshchenko wrote: > I'm leaning towards keeping [noissue] and have

Re: [Pulp-dev] [noissue] considered harmful

+1 to keep [noissue] and reviewer keeps an eye whether an opened issue is needed. Regards, Ina Panova Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. "Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 6:51 PM Daniel Alley