You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com> on 2015/08/17 16:25:39 UTC
[PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Hi all,
There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time, as long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why there is a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we actively work on them and might keep people from contributing.
Proposal:
Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
How?
For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as we cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By using a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM and no -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've sent this e-mail.
Work lost?
The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping author and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You can then send it as a new PR.
Example:
prId=12345
git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work" pr/${prId}
git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
If -1, what should we do instead?
Regards,
Remi
Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
-0
I think there is no harm in keeping the PRs open which are not merged yet, as a reference which can be picked up by someone over time and merged/closed later. For example, here is an interesting PR that is more than a month old but if you close it we risk forgetting about it: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/372
The age of the PR is perhaps another point of discussion, perhaps it may be okay to close a PR that is more than a year, or at least 6+ years old, but not month+ old.
On 17-Aug-2015, at 7:55 pm, Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>> wrote:
Hi all,
There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time, as long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why there is a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we actively work on them and might keep people from contributing.
Proposal:
Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
How?
For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as we cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By using a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM and no -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've sent this e-mail.
Work lost?
The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping author and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You can then send it as a new PR.
Example:
prId=12345
git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work" pr/${prId}
git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
If -1, what should we do instead?
Regards,
Remi
Regards,
Rohit Yadav
Software Architect, ShapeBlue
[cid:9DD97B41-04C5-45F0-92A7-951F3E962F7A]
M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com<ma...@shapeblue.com>
Blog: bhaisaab.org<http://bhaisaab.org> | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
CloudStack Software Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
CloudStack Infrastructure Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>.
Hi Boris,
I like the idea, but this is a bit harder than it seems. We only have read-only access to GitHub, because it is a mirror of the actual git repo at Apache. That’s why we cannot simply close PRs etc. For the same reason, I cannot create labels or assign them. Not even for the PRs I submitted myself.
The closed PRs do get linked to the PR that closed them, because it was mentioned there. So, there’s a way to track them, just not as handy as a GitHub label would have been.
If anyone knows of a trick, let me know!
Regards,
Remi
> On 17 Aug 2015, at 18:09, Boris Schrijver <bo...@pcextreme.nl> wrote:
>
> Remi,
>
> Would it be possible to give the closed PRs which are not merged due to
> inactivity or unfinished code-work a label? So the can be recognized when they
> are closed?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Boris Schrijver
>
> TEL: +31633784542
> MAIL: boris@pcextreme.nl
>
>>
>> On August 17, 2015 at 5:49 PM Somesh Naidu <So...@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Regards,
>> Somesh
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:26 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
>> their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
>>
>> As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
>> actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time, as
>> long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why there is
>> a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we actively work on
>> them and might keep people from contributing.
>>
>> Proposal:
>> Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
>>
>> How?
>> For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
>> make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as we
>> cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By using
>> a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM and no
>> -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've sent this
>> e-mail.
>>
>> Work lost?
>> The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
>> take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping author
>> and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You can then
>> send it as a new PR.
>>
>> Example:
>> prId=12345
>> git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
>> git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
>> pr/${prId}
>> git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
>>
>>
>> Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
>>
>> If -1, what should we do instead?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Remi
>>
>
RE: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Boris Schrijver <bo...@pcextreme.nl>.
Remi,
Would it be possible to give the closed PRs which are not merged due to
inactivity or unfinished code-work a label? So the can be recognized when they
are closed?
Best regards,
Boris Schrijver
TEL: +31633784542
MAIL: boris@pcextreme.nl
>
> On August 17, 2015 at 5:49 PM Somesh Naidu <So...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> +1
>
> Regards,
> Somesh
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:26 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
>
> Hi all,
>
> There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
> their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
>
> As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
> actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time, as
> long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why there is
> a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we actively work on
> them and might keep people from contributing.
>
> Proposal:
> Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
>
> How?
> For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
> make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as we
> cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By using
> a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM and no
> -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've sent this
> e-mail.
>
> Work lost?
> The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
> take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping author
> and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You can then
> send it as a new PR.
>
> Example:
> prId=12345
> git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
> git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
> pr/${prId}
> git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
>
>
> Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
>
> If -1, what should we do instead?
>
> Regards,
> Remi
>
>
RE: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Somesh Naidu <So...@citrix.com>.
+1
Regards,
Somesh
-----Original Message-----
From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:26 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Hi all,
There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time, as long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why there is a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we actively work on them and might keep people from contributing.
Proposal:
Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
How?
For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as we cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By using a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM and no -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've sent this e-mail.
Work lost?
The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping author and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You can then send it as a new PR.
Example:
prId=12345
git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work" pr/${prId}
git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
If -1, what should we do instead?
Regards,
Remi
Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>.
Hi all,
This PR includes the ones we can close now:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/706
Any LGTM’s so we can merge it?
Thanks,
Remi
On 17 Aug 2015, at 18:56, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>> wrote:
+1 for auto closing.
I also agree with Boris that we need to distinguish discarded vs. Merged
prs.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 21:51 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com<ma...@solidfire.com>> wrote:
+1 Sounds reasonable
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>
<javascript:;>>
wrote:
Hi all,
There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer
time,
as long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why
there is a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we
actively work on them and might keep people from contributing.
Proposal:
Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
How?
For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot
(as
we cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers).
By
using a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM
and no -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've
sent this e-mail.
Work lost?
The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping
author and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You
can then send it as a new PR.
Example:
prId=12345
git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
pr/${prId}
git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
If -1, what should we do instead?
Regards,
Remi
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com<ma...@solidfire.com> <javascript:;>
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
--
-
Sent from Windows Phone
~Rajani
Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>.
Hi Rajani,
If we truly “merge” PRs, which I think we should do (instead of applying a patch) then those will be in state “Merged” (purple) versus “Closed” (red).
Regards,
Remi
On 17 Aug 2015, at 18:56, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>> wrote:
+1 for auto closing.
I also agree with Boris that we need to distinguish discarded vs. Merged
prs.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 21:51 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com<ma...@solidfire.com>> wrote:
+1 Sounds reasonable
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>
<javascript:;>>
wrote:
Hi all,
There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer
time,
as long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why
there is a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we
actively work on them and might keep people from contributing.
Proposal:
Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
How?
For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot
(as
we cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers).
By
using a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM
and no -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've
sent this e-mail.
Work lost?
The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping
author and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You
can then send it as a new PR.
Example:
prId=12345
git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
pr/${prId}
git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
If -1, what should we do instead?
Regards,
Remi
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com<ma...@solidfire.com> <javascript:;>
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
--
-
Sent from Windows Phone
~Rajani
Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>.
+1 for auto closing.
I also agree with Boris that we need to distinguish discarded vs. Merged
prs.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 21:51 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
+1 Sounds reasonable
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Remi Bergsma <RBergsma@schubergphilis.com
<javascript:;>>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
> their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
>
> As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
> actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer
time,
> as long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why
> there is a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we
> actively work on them and might keep people from contributing.
>
> Proposal:
> Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
>
> How?
> For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
> make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot
(as
> we cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers).
By
> using a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM
> and no -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've
> sent this e-mail.
>
> Work lost?
> The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
> take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping
> author and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You
> can then send it as a new PR.
>
> Example:
> prId=12345
> git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
> git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
> pr/${prId}
> git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
>
>
> Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
>
> If -1, what should we do instead?
>
> Regards,
> Remi
>
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
--
-
Sent from Windows Phone
~Rajani
Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
Posted by Mike Tutkowski <mi...@solidfire.com>.
+1 Sounds reasonable
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
> their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
>
> As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
> actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time,
> as long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why
> there is a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we
> actively work on them and might keep people from contributing.
>
> Proposal:
> Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
>
> How?
> For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
> make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as
> we cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By
> using a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM
> and no -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've
> sent this e-mail.
>
> Work lost?
> The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
> take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping
> author and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You
> can then send it as a new PR.
>
> Example:
> prId=12345
> git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
> git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
> pr/${prId}
> git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
>
>
> Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
>
> If -1, what should we do instead?
>
> Regards,
> Remi
>
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*