Re: [gentoo-dev] RFI: A better workflow for github pull requests

[Raymond Jennings]

I agree.  I think that any "master" version of whatever repo we use should
be hosted on gentoo owned infrastructure.

Github might be allowed to take pull requests but I think it should be a
slave to whatever's hosted on gentoo.

That way if anything gets screwed up on github gentoo could always hit the
big fat reset button on gitub


On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>
wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 21:12:25 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hello, everyone.
> >
> > The current workflow for handling github pull requests is at least
> > suboptimal. Handling pull requests takes a fair effort from the few
> > developers contributing there, and the progress is often stalled by
> > package maintainers which are either unresponsive or not registered on
> > github at all. That's why I'd like to get your ideas on how we could
> > improve the workflow.
> >
> >
> >
> > Current workflow
> > ================
> >
> > Let's summarize the current workflow first. Right now, there's a few
> > Gentoo developers who actively monitor pull requests on gentoo/gentoo
> > repository. Those developers review incoming pull requests and help
> > submitters get their contributions in shape. Some of those developers
> > also try to 'CC' (@-mention) package maintainers to get their attention
> > on the pull request.
> >
> > Sadly, @-mentioning sucks for a few reasons:
> >
> > 1. Many of the Gentoo developers have different nicknames on GitHub.
> > Some developers don't even set their real names which makes them even
> > harder to find.
> >
> > 2. Teams can be created only by repository 'owners' (which pretty much
> > is equivalent of Infra). Which practically means I'm the only person
> > migrating teams (projects, herds) to GitHub.
> >
> > 3. GitHub notifications are not very reliable. Some developers get only
> > some of them via mail, some don't. And some simply don't care.
> >
> > 4. Some developers openly refuse to work with contributors via GitHub.
> > Proxying them manually is not really productive.
> >
> >
> >
> > Potential solution: bi-dir github <=> bugzilla integration
> > ==========================================================
> >
> > My current idea would be pretty much that:
> >
> > 1. a new dedicated Gentoo bug would be automatically created for every
> > pull request on github,
> >
> > 2. all comments from github would be automatically copied to bugzie.
> > All bugzie comments would be automatically copied to github,
> >
> > 3. resolving the bug would automatically close the relevant pull
> > request.
> >
> > This way, all pull requests can be assigned to package maintainers in
> > Bugzilla without having to resort to GitHub user or team names. All
> > involved parties would get more reliable Bugzilla notification mails.
> > They could choose to either use the provided URLs to discuss the pull
> > request on GitHub, or discuss it directly on Bugzilla, whichever is
> > more convenient to them.
> >
> > The additional Bugzilla load should be manageable, though we may want
> > to employ some kind of rate limiting in case someone though it'd funny
> > to spam our bugzilla via spamming github.
> >
> > Problems:
> >
> > - handling line comments (probably a Bugzie comment with quoted code
> >   snippet),
> >
> > - handling comment edits and removals,
> >
> > - some people will get double mail for each comment,
> >
> > - extra bugs for existing issues (we shouldn't really try to reuse
> >   existing bugs for this).
> >
> >
> >
> > What are your thoughts? Any other proposals?
>
> Gentoo workflow should not depend on a proprietary tools like
> github issue tracker and github pull requests.
>
> Best regards,
> Andrew Savchenko
>