Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-19 Thread Maurits van Rees

Op 17-09-13 17:15, Marius Gedminas schreef:

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:35:58AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:

FWIW the only reason I'm in favour of self-merges is that this
short-circuits the have you signed the ZF committer agreement? dance.
Only people who have can merge.


Sorry, I don't understand the point you're making.


I'll try to explain better.


I also feel silly when I ask this question from people with very
familiar names.  (I feel that I have to do when I don't see ZF
membership on their GitHub profile.)


So are you saying you don't merge other people's code because
you don't want to ask if they're contributors?


No.  I'm saying the reviewer-merges workflow looks like this:

1. Somebody creates a pull request
2. A reviewer reviews
3. OP fixes
4. Reviewer asks have you signed the agreement?  if not please sign
5. OP says he/she signed it
6. Reviewer trusts OP's word and merges

(I don't have a good short word for somebody who created the pull
request, so I abused Original Poster.)

Whereas I'd prefer

1. Somebody creates a pull request
2. A reviewer reviews
3. OP fixes
4. Reviewer says looks good to me, feel free to merge (if you're not a
committer already, see http://foundation.zope.org/agreements)
5. OP merges

It's not a very strong preference.  I can feel myself changing my mind
already ;-)

OTOH the implicit trust in step 6 makes me a bit uneasy, and I'm not
quite sure how to verify the fact of the signing.  Wait for the user to
show up in https://github.com/zopefoundation?tab=members ?


Checking that list seems the best to me.

This could be a reason to prefer that the 'pull requester' creates a 
branch in the original repository within the zopefoundation: if he can 
do that, it proves he is authorized and has signed the agreement.


BTW, I have just now seen that I am on that list in the members tab, but 
in the greyed out section, which I think means that non-members do not 
see me listed.  There was a button 'Publicize membership' next to my 
name so I clicked and am now in the top 'full-color' list.  :-)  Others 
may want to do the same.



--
Maurits van Rees: http://maurits.vanrees.org/
Zest Software: http://zestsoftware.nl

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jan-Wijbrand Kolman

Hi,

I wonder if there is a formal or informal write-up of how to nicely 
contribute code to the repositories under the zopefoundation umbrella.


Back in the subversion days I would branch a project, amend code, write 
tests, commit this to the repository, ask for feedback on the list, and, 
when deemed acceptable, merge my changes back to the project's trunk, 
perhaps even make a release of the project.


Yesterday I wanted to add a small feature to zope.formlib and wondered 
whether I should:


1) clone the canonical zope.formlib repository, make a branch, do my 
work, push the changes, ask for feedback on the list and eventually 
merge the branch to the mainline.


or

2) fork the repository, make a branch in the fork, do my work, push the 
changes to my fork, and issue a pull request.


The latter is what I did, without explicitly asking for feedback. 
Luckily someone did give me feedback (thanks!) :-)


Now that I mended the pull request, should I merge the pull request 
myself? Or is the current etiquette that someone else should merge the 
pull request?


My apologies in case I missed an obvious document or reference somewhere 
that describes the way we should work with the zopefoundation's 
codebase...


kind regards, jw

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Marius Gedminas
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:04:04PM +0200, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:
 I wonder if there is a formal or informal write-up of how to
 nicely contribute code to the repositories under the
 zopefoundation umbrella.

I don't think so.  I'd like to see one.

 Back in the subversion days I would branch a project, amend code,
 write tests, commit this to the repository, ask for feedback on the
 list, and, when deemed acceptable, merge my changes back to the
 project's trunk, perhaps even make a release of the project.
 
 Yesterday I wanted to add a small feature to zope.formlib and
 wondered whether I should:
 
 1) clone the canonical zope.formlib repository, make a branch, do
 my work, push the changes, ask for feedback on the list and
 eventually merge the branch to the mainline.
 
 or
 
 2) fork the repository, make a branch in the fork, do my work, push
 the changes to my fork, and issue a pull request.
 
 The latter is what I did, without explicitly asking for feedback.
 Luckily someone did give me feedback (thanks!) :-)

I think a pull request is right.

It doesn't matter much if the branch you're asking to pull is in the
main repository or in a private fork.

 Now that I mended the pull request, should I merge the pull request
 myself? Or is the current etiquette that someone else should merge
 the pull request?

I think it's fine to merge own pull requests, provided that somebody
+1'd it.  (Or if nobody cared for a couple of weeks, even after asking
for feedback on the list.)

 My apologies in case I missed an obvious document or reference
 somewhere that describes the way we should work with the
 zopefoundation's codebase...

Can we please get the http://foundation.zope.org/ website source on
GitHub, so it becomes maintainable by the community?

Marius Gedminas
-- 
http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3/BlueBream consulting and development


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jan-Wijbrand Kolman

On 9/17/13 12:04 PM, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:
snip

2) fork the repository, make a branch in the fork, do my work, push the
changes to my fork, and issue a pull request.

The latter is what I did, without explicitly asking for feedback.
Luckily someone did give me feedback (thanks!) :-)

Now that I mended the pull request, should I merge the pull request
myself? Or is the current etiquette that someone else should merge the
pull request?


This is what I did just now.
Kind regards, jw

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jan-Wijbrand Kolman

On 9/17/13 1:00 PM, Marius Gedminas wrote:

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:04:04PM +0200, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:

I wonder if there is a formal or informal write-up of how to
nicely contribute code to the repositories under the
zopefoundation umbrella.


I don't think so.  I'd like to see one.


I think we're writing it Right Now :-)

regards, jw


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jim Fulton
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
...
 2) fork the repository, make a branch in the fork, do my work, push
 the changes to my fork, and issue a pull request.

 The latter is what I did, without explicitly asking for feedback.
 Luckily someone did give me feedback (thanks!) :-)

 I think a pull request is right.

Yup.

 It doesn't matter much if the branch you're asking to pull is in the
 main repository or in a private fork.

Yup.

(Apparently, number of forks is a way some people keep score
 on github, so I'll cynically say a fork is better.)

 Now that I mended the pull request, should I merge the pull request
 myself? Or is the current etiquette that someone else should merge
 the pull request?

 I think it's fine to merge own pull requests, provided that somebody
 +1'd it.  (Or if nobody cared for a couple of weeks, even after asking
 for feedback on the list.)

I strongly prefer that the reviewer do the merge.

I'd also really like reviewers to take their responsibility
seriously, making comments and suggestions where appropriate.

Software review, done well, improves the software, and, more
importantly, improves the developers.


 My apologies in case I missed an obvious document or reference
 somewhere that describes the way we should work with the
 zopefoundation's codebase...

 Can we please get the http://foundation.zope.org/ website source on
 GitHub, so it becomes maintainable by the community?

Oh yes, please! Unfortunately, this will require moving from
silva to sphinx.  It will also entail separating the public
sites from private documents.

(The above isn't meant to dis silva, it's just not a good
fit for zopefoundation.org.)

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jan-Wijbrand Kolman

On 9/17/13 1:47 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:

I strongly prefer that the reviewer do the merge.

I'd also really like reviewers to take their responsibility
seriously, making comments and suggestions where appropriate.

Software review, done well, improves the software, and, more
importantly, improves the developers.


I agree - I know I get better from recieving feedback :-)

Is this reviewer role something someone takes upon himself? I mean, if 
I see a pull request for a code base that I know, I could review the 
request?


Or do we acknowledge a group of people that generally do reviews (again 
formally of informally, I don't mind, I'm not looking for official 
procedures)?


In any case, a second pair of eyes before merging is very helpful!

regards, jw

p.s. Another thing I noticed: some of the discussion about changes and 
patches and fixes now shift from the mailinglist to github. This is 
fine, I guess.


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Marius Gedminas
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 07:47:42AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
  Now that I mended the pull request, should I merge the pull request
  myself? Or is the current etiquette that someone else should merge
  the pull request?
 
  I think it's fine to merge own pull requests, provided that somebody
  +1'd it.  (Or if nobody cared for a couple of weeks, even after asking
  for feedback on the list.)
 
 I strongly prefer that the reviewer do the merge.

FWIW the only reason I'm in favour of self-merges is that this
short-circuits the have you signed the ZF committer agreement? dance.
Only people who have can merge.

I also feel silly when I ask this question from people with very
familiar names.  (I feel that I have to do when I don't see ZF
membership on their GitHub profile.)

 I'd also really like reviewers to take their responsibility
 seriously, making comments and suggestions where appropriate.

Oh, absolutely.

 Software review, done well, improves the software, and, more
 importantly, improves the developers.

Marius Gedminas
-- 
http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3/BlueBream consulting and development


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jim Fulton
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman
janwijbr...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 9/17/13 1:47 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:

 I strongly prefer that the reviewer do the merge.

 I'd also really like reviewers to take their responsibility
 seriously, making comments and suggestions where appropriate.

 Software review, done well, improves the software, and, more
 importantly, improves the developers.


 I agree - I know I get better from recieving feedback :-)

 Is this reviewer role something someone takes upon himself? I mean, if I
 see a pull request for a code base that I know, I could review the request?

These are good questions.  I probably don't have satisfying answers.

The short answer is that I think people who contribute to a project
should view review as one of their duties.  For better or worse, this is
somewhat informal.

If you don't get a review in a timely manner, try posting to the
appropriate mailing list to request a review.

 Or do we acknowledge a group of people that generally do reviews (again
 formally of informally, I don't mind, I'm not looking for official
 procedures)?

No.

 p.s. Another thing I noticed: some of the discussion about changes and
 patches and fixes now shift from the mailinglist to github. This is fine, I
 guess.

Yes, IMO.

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jim Fulton
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 07:47:42AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
  Now that I mended the pull request, should I merge the pull request
  myself? Or is the current etiquette that someone else should merge
  the pull request?
 
  I think it's fine to merge own pull requests, provided that somebody
  +1'd it.  (Or if nobody cared for a couple of weeks, even after asking
  for feedback on the list.)

 I strongly prefer that the reviewer do the merge.

 FWIW the only reason I'm in favour of self-merges is that this
 short-circuits the have you signed the ZF committer agreement? dance.
 Only people who have can merge.

Sorry, I don't understand the point you're making.

 I also feel silly when I ask this question from people with very
 familiar names.  (I feel that I have to do when I don't see ZF
 membership on their GitHub profile.)

So are you saying you don't merge other people's code because
you don't want to ask if they're contributors?

I can understand this, but I'd still try to encourage a more review-centric
workflow.

Also, if a change is trivial, the PR doesn't have to be from a contributor.
I understand that triviality isn't always clear.

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Jan-Wijbrand Kolman

On 9/17/13 3:32 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman

Is this reviewer role something someone takes upon himself? I mean, if I
see a pull request for a code base that I know, I could review the request?


These are good questions.  I probably don't have satisfying answers.

The short answer is that I think people who contribute to a project
should view review as one of their duties.  For better or worse, this is
somewhat informal.

If you don't get a review in a timely manner, try posting to the
appropriate mailing list to request a review.


Works for me :-)
regards, jw


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] github etiquette

2013-09-17 Thread Marius Gedminas
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:35:58AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
  FWIW the only reason I'm in favour of self-merges is that this
  short-circuits the have you signed the ZF committer agreement? dance.
  Only people who have can merge.
 
 Sorry, I don't understand the point you're making.

I'll try to explain better.

  I also feel silly when I ask this question from people with very
  familiar names.  (I feel that I have to do when I don't see ZF
  membership on their GitHub profile.)
 
 So are you saying you don't merge other people's code because
 you don't want to ask if they're contributors?

No.  I'm saying the reviewer-merges workflow looks like this:

1. Somebody creates a pull request
2. A reviewer reviews
3. OP fixes
4. Reviewer asks have you signed the agreement?  if not please sign
5. OP says he/she signed it
6. Reviewer trusts OP's word and merges

(I don't have a good short word for somebody who created the pull
request, so I abused Original Poster.)

Whereas I'd prefer

1. Somebody creates a pull request
2. A reviewer reviews
3. OP fixes
4. Reviewer says looks good to me, feel free to merge (if you're not a
   committer already, see http://foundation.zope.org/agreements)
5. OP merges

It's not a very strong preference.  I can feel myself changing my mind
already ;-)

OTOH the implicit trust in step 6 makes me a bit uneasy, and I'm not
quite sure how to verify the fact of the signing.  Wait for the user to
show up in https://github.com/zopefoundation?tab=members ?

 I can understand this, but I'd still try to encourage a more review-centric
 workflow.

+1

 Also, if a change is trivial, the PR doesn't have to be from a contributor.
 I understand that triviality isn't always clear.

It's completely unclear to me, once the PR goes beyond typo fixes. :(

Marius Gedminas
-- 
http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3/BlueBream consulting and development


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )