Patching and JIRA?

[Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>]

Hi All,

In the past, when I've used JIRA and uploaded multiple versions of
patches to the same issue, I've simply used the same filename, and
JIRA took care of putting a strikethrough in the listings for the old
version of the patch, indicating that they were available but should
be ignored.

These days, it simply greys the old patch versions out. It makes
things a little less clear as to which patches should be applied to
obtain the fix.

There is some value in maintaining a patch history, but in many cases
old patches should be trashed to make it clear which patch should be
applied to obtain the fix.

Any patch posted should contain the entire change for a given issue,
as opposed to requiring individuals working the issue to apply
multpile patches to obtain an update.

Does this make sense, or does anyone think patches should be handled
differently?

Drew

Re: Patching and JIRA?

[Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>]

emphatic +1 for moving to Git :)

On Sunday, October 14, 2012, Christopher Tubbs <ct...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd almost prefer all patches to be submitted as a link to a GitHub
> repo, but since our SCM is SVN natively, I'm not sure how well that
> would work. It would certainly be ideal if we had a native Git repo
> for Accumulo... is the one on apache.org writable, or just a read only
> view of what's in svn?
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> In the past, when I've used JIRA and uploaded multiple versions of
>> patches to the same issue, I've simply used the same filename, and
>> JIRA took care of putting a strikethrough in the listings for the old
>> version of the patch, indicating that they were available but should
>> be ignored.
>>
>> These days, it simply greys the old patch versions out. It makes
>> things a little less clear as to which patches should be applied to
>> obtain the fix.
>>
>> There is some value in maintaining a patch history, but in many cases
>> old patches should be trashed to make it clear which patch should be
>> applied to obtain the fix.
>>
>> Any patch posted should contain the entire change for a given issue,
>> as opposed to requiring individuals working the issue to apply
>> multpile patches to obtain an update.
>>
>> Does this make sense, or does anyone think patches should be handled
>> differently?
>>
>> Drew
>

Re: Patching and JIRA?

[Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Christopher Tubbs <ct...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd almost prefer all patches to be submitted as a link to a GitHub
> repo, but since our SCM is SVN natively, I'm not sure how well that
> would work. It would certainly be ideal if we had a native Git repo
> for Accumulo... is the one on apache.org writable, or just a read only
> view of what's in svn?

The community can opt to move from svn to git at Apache. If you do so,
however, you still have some issues with patches. The Apache licence
states that patches submitted to Apache mailing lists or otherwise
delivered to Apache infrastructure are official, licensed,
contributions. I'm not sure of the status of 'please pull this from
repo X' email -- I haven't followed the discussions in that area
carefully.


>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> In the past, when I've used JIRA and uploaded multiple versions of
>> patches to the same issue, I've simply used the same filename, and
>> JIRA took care of putting a strikethrough in the listings for the old
>> version of the patch, indicating that they were available but should
>> be ignored.
>>
>> These days, it simply greys the old patch versions out. It makes
>> things a little less clear as to which patches should be applied to
>> obtain the fix.
>>
>> There is some value in maintaining a patch history, but in many cases
>> old patches should be trashed to make it clear which patch should be
>> applied to obtain the fix.
>>
>> Any patch posted should contain the entire change for a given issue,
>> as opposed to requiring individuals working the issue to apply
>> multpile patches to obtain an update.
>>
>> Does this make sense, or does anyone think patches should be handled
>> differently?
>>
>> Drew

Re: Patching and JIRA?

[Christopher Tubbs <ct...@gmail.com>]

I'd almost prefer all patches to be submitted as a link to a GitHub
repo, but since our SCM is SVN natively, I'm not sure how well that
would work. It would certainly be ideal if we had a native Git repo
for Accumulo... is the one on apache.org writable, or just a read only
view of what's in svn?

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii


On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> In the past, when I've used JIRA and uploaded multiple versions of
> patches to the same issue, I've simply used the same filename, and
> JIRA took care of putting a strikethrough in the listings for the old
> version of the patch, indicating that they were available but should
> be ignored.
>
> These days, it simply greys the old patch versions out. It makes
> things a little less clear as to which patches should be applied to
> obtain the fix.
>
> There is some value in maintaining a patch history, but in many cases
> old patches should be trashed to make it clear which patch should be
> applied to obtain the fix.
>
> Any patch posted should contain the entire change for a given issue,
> as opposed to requiring individuals working the issue to apply
> multpile patches to obtain an update.
>
> Does this make sense, or does anyone think patches should be handled
> differently?
>
> Drew