You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ignite.apache.org by Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com> on 2021/02/20 11:31:20 UTC
Apache Ignite 3.x: order in repository
Hi, Igniters!
When we started Ignite 3.x in new repository, not only we have received a chance to cleanup codebase, but to maintain some order in development tools, like GitHub.
Currently in 2.x repository we have lots of stalled PRs and branches, which not only clog the repository, but also indirectly influence TC performance (due to necessity to check for updates every ref: branches and PRs).
Could I suggest we devise some recommendations for using PR's and branches in new repo and add some rules about stalled PRs at least, like closing them if inactive for some time.
Also we can activate some settings in repo's configuration, like auto delete branch after PR is merged.
WDYT?
Re: Apache Ignite 3.x: order in repository
Posted by Yakov <yz...@apache.org>.
>For example, by enforcing that all changes are
merged only through PRs. That, however, means that all contributors are
forced to work with GitHub, which is not necessarily a great thing.
I think we had this flow in mind when Ignite was started. I don't see any
issue with forking unless prs can be integrated to the process, e.g. tc
visas, jira, etc.
Agree with Pavel - PRs older than some threshold can be closed. As far as
Stephen's comment for PRs being ignored I would say that it is more on
author of the PR to drive the PR to the point it gets merged by seeking the
review(ers) and making sure all the checks pass. And any closed PR can be
brought back
Yakov
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021, 05:19 Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kulichenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> Petr,
>
> Any suggestions on how to fix this? One of the ideas that come to my mind
> is to unify the process. For example, by enforcing that all changes are
> merged only through PRs. That, however, means that all contributors are
> forced to work with GitHub, which is not necessarily a great thing.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Val
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:45 AM Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'd guess that one of the main problem with inactive PRs is in creation
> of
> > PR for reviewing but merging it from command line (not via GitHub
> > interface).
> > Also, of course, there are lots of efforts which are abandoned after
> first
> > review, or even do not have a chance to be reviewed at all.
> >
> >
> > > On 22 Feb 2021, at 11:51, Stephen Darlington <
> > stephen.darlington@gridgain.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think we need to be able answer the question “Why are there so many
> > inactive PRs?" before we automate their removal. If perfectly good
> changes
> > are being ignored, we have a problem.
> > >
> > > Removing branches of merged PRs and protecting the main branch make
> > sense.
> > >
> > >> On 20 Feb 2021, at 18:30, Pavel Tupitsyn <pt...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> - Close inactive PRs (1 month or so?)
> > >> - Enable main branch protection (no force pushes, require linear
> > history,
> > >> require status checks)
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 2:31 PM Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi, Igniters!
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> When we started Ignite 3.x in new repository, not only we have
> > received a
> > >>> chance to cleanup codebase, but to maintain some order in development
> > >>> tools, like GitHub.
> > >>> Currently in 2.x repository we have lots of stalled PRs and branches,
> > >>> which not only clog the repository, but also indirectly influence TC
> > >>> performance (due to necessity to check for updates every ref:
> branches
> > and
> > >>> PRs).
> > >>>
> > >>> Could I suggest we devise some recommendations for using PR's and
> > branches
> > >>> in new repo and add some rules about stalled PRs at least, like
> closing
> > >>> them if inactive for some time.
> > >>> Also we can activate some settings in repo's configuration, like auto
> > >>> delete branch after PR is merged.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> WDYT?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: Apache Ignite 3.x: order in repository
Posted by Valentin Kulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Petr,
Any suggestions on how to fix this? One of the ideas that come to my mind
is to unify the process. For example, by enforcing that all changes are
merged only through PRs. That, however, means that all contributors are
forced to work with GitHub, which is not necessarily a great thing.
Thoughts?
-Val
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:45 AM Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd guess that one of the main problem with inactive PRs is in creation of
> PR for reviewing but merging it from command line (not via GitHub
> interface).
> Also, of course, there are lots of efforts which are abandoned after first
> review, or even do not have a chance to be reviewed at all.
>
>
> > On 22 Feb 2021, at 11:51, Stephen Darlington <
> stephen.darlington@gridgain.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think we need to be able answer the question “Why are there so many
> inactive PRs?" before we automate their removal. If perfectly good changes
> are being ignored, we have a problem.
> >
> > Removing branches of merged PRs and protecting the main branch make
> sense.
> >
> >> On 20 Feb 2021, at 18:30, Pavel Tupitsyn <pt...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> - Close inactive PRs (1 month or so?)
> >> - Enable main branch protection (no force pushes, require linear
> history,
> >> require status checks)
> >>
> >> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 2:31 PM Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi, Igniters!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> When we started Ignite 3.x in new repository, not only we have
> received a
> >>> chance to cleanup codebase, but to maintain some order in development
> >>> tools, like GitHub.
> >>> Currently in 2.x repository we have lots of stalled PRs and branches,
> >>> which not only clog the repository, but also indirectly influence TC
> >>> performance (due to necessity to check for updates every ref: branches
> and
> >>> PRs).
> >>>
> >>> Could I suggest we devise some recommendations for using PR's and
> branches
> >>> in new repo and add some rules about stalled PRs at least, like closing
> >>> them if inactive for some time.
> >>> Also we can activate some settings in repo's configuration, like auto
> >>> delete branch after PR is merged.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> WDYT?
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Apache Ignite 3.x: order in repository
Posted by Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com>.
I'd guess that one of the main problem with inactive PRs is in creation of PR for reviewing but merging it from command line (not via GitHub interface).
Also, of course, there are lots of efforts which are abandoned after first review, or even do not have a chance to be reviewed at all.
> On 22 Feb 2021, at 11:51, Stephen Darlington <st...@gridgain.com> wrote:
>
> I think we need to be able answer the question “Why are there so many inactive PRs?" before we automate their removal. If perfectly good changes are being ignored, we have a problem.
>
> Removing branches of merged PRs and protecting the main branch make sense.
>
>> On 20 Feb 2021, at 18:30, Pavel Tupitsyn <pt...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>> - Close inactive PRs (1 month or so?)
>> - Enable main branch protection (no force pushes, require linear history,
>> require status checks)
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 2:31 PM Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Igniters!
>>>
>>>
>>> When we started Ignite 3.x in new repository, not only we have received a
>>> chance to cleanup codebase, but to maintain some order in development
>>> tools, like GitHub.
>>> Currently in 2.x repository we have lots of stalled PRs and branches,
>>> which not only clog the repository, but also indirectly influence TC
>>> performance (due to necessity to check for updates every ref: branches and
>>> PRs).
>>>
>>> Could I suggest we devise some recommendations for using PR's and branches
>>> in new repo and add some rules about stalled PRs at least, like closing
>>> them if inactive for some time.
>>> Also we can activate some settings in repo's configuration, like auto
>>> delete branch after PR is merged.
>>>
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>
>
Re: Apache Ignite 3.x: order in repository
Posted by Stephen Darlington <st...@gridgain.com>.
I think we need to be able answer the question “Why are there so many inactive PRs?" before we automate their removal. If perfectly good changes are being ignored, we have a problem.
Removing branches of merged PRs and protecting the main branch make sense.
> On 20 Feb 2021, at 18:30, Pavel Tupitsyn <pt...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> - Close inactive PRs (1 month or so?)
> - Enable main branch protection (no force pushes, require linear history,
> require status checks)
>
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 2:31 PM Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Igniters!
>>
>>
>> When we started Ignite 3.x in new repository, not only we have received a
>> chance to cleanup codebase, but to maintain some order in development
>> tools, like GitHub.
>> Currently in 2.x repository we have lots of stalled PRs and branches,
>> which not only clog the repository, but also indirectly influence TC
>> performance (due to necessity to check for updates every ref: branches and
>> PRs).
>>
>> Could I suggest we devise some recommendations for using PR's and branches
>> in new repo and add some rules about stalled PRs at least, like closing
>> them if inactive for some time.
>> Also we can activate some settings in repo's configuration, like auto
>> delete branch after PR is merged.
>>
>>
>> WDYT?
Re: Apache Ignite 3.x: order in repository
Posted by Pavel Tupitsyn <pt...@apache.org>.
+1
- Close inactive PRs (1 month or so?)
- Enable main branch protection (no force pushes, require linear history,
require status checks)
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 2:31 PM Petr Ivanov <mr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Igniters!
>
>
> When we started Ignite 3.x in new repository, not only we have received a
> chance to cleanup codebase, but to maintain some order in development
> tools, like GitHub.
> Currently in 2.x repository we have lots of stalled PRs and branches,
> which not only clog the repository, but also indirectly influence TC
> performance (due to necessity to check for updates every ref: branches and
> PRs).
>
> Could I suggest we devise some recommendations for using PR's and branches
> in new repo and add some rules about stalled PRs at least, like closing
> them if inactive for some time.
> Also we can activate some settings in repo's configuration, like auto
> delete branch after PR is merged.
>
>
> WDYT?