hi folks, Following up on this. My suggestion for a workflow to help with large code reviews for Arrow is:
1) We set up an Arrow project on gerrit.cloudera.org. I'm hoping we see gerrit.apache.org someday. 2) For reviews needing more careful scrutiny, code reviewer can request to conduct the CR on Gerrit 3) Contributor will push change sets to Gerrit 4) [The slightly awkward part] In parallel, contributor will open a PR on GitHub for purposes of trigging Travis CI verification 5) Arrow committer may cherry-pick verified commits to master and push to ASF git repo My understanding (someone more experienced should chime in) is that Gerrit reviews are all made relative to the parent commit for a particular change set. Thus, we may not need to worry (for now) about synchronization issues between Gerrit and GitHub / ASF git. Does this make sense? Any other ideas / thoughts welcome Thanks, Wes On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Hanifi GUNES <hanifigu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I worked with Gerrit and GH both. My personal preference would be in favor > of Gerrit because of its power user ready-ness and tight integration with > git + git cli. Afaics there are legitimate concerns around possible > trickiness of novice users' interaction with Gerrit. Not sure if this was > mentioned above but there seems a Gerrit + GH plugin that mirrors GH > pull-requests to Gerrit changes. Never used it but still this may be of > help. > > > 1: https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/github/+/master/README.md > > 2016-05-13 8:47 GMT-07:00 Jason Altekruse <ja...@dremio.com>: > >> If everyone else would prefer Gerrit, I would be okay with using it >> exclusively to simplify things. It does have several nice features beyond >> reviewboard as it manages its own git repository, rather than just patch >> files. >> >> Jason Altekruse >> Software Engineer at Dremio >> Apache Drill Committer >> >> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Apparently it is possible, but quite a lot of work: >> > >> > https://github.com/andygrunwald/gotrap >> > >> > The ideal thing, it would seem, would be to have the Gerrit code >> > reviews with automatic replication of updated patch sets to a pull >> > request (i.e. each new patch set force pushes the branch). I don't >> > think we're going to get that, so I'm not sure how to proceed. The >> > Kudu team uses Gerrit + Jenkins trigger (e.g. see it in action here >> > http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/2992/) >> > >> > - Wes >> > >> > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > Does gerrit work well with TravisCI, or will we need to develop/setup >> > > another continuous integration solution? >> > > >> > > On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Daniel Robinson >> > > <danrobinson...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> Admittedly, coming from the complete opposite end of the commit-size >> > spectrum, the JIRA issue + GitHub pull request workflow already feels a >> > little frictional for simple bugfixes and additions, so I was wary of >> > Gerrit. But it actually looks pretty well-suited to small commits. >> > >> One advantage I'd see to different platforms, though, would be the >> > potential for JIRA integration. GitHub seems to have a more built-in >> > solution for this, if it's something you could foresee setting up. But >> > there seem to be ways to do it with Gerrit too. >> > >> Clearly having an option to use GitHub pull requests lowers the >> > barriers to entry for contributors, but I understand easy pull requests >> are >> > a double-edged sword for maintainers! >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> _____________________________ >> > >> From: Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2016 12:46 AM >> > >> Subject: Re: Code review tools for Arrow patches >> > >> To: <dev@arrow.apache.org> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> I'm also on board with this if it doesn't deter new contributors (it's >> > >> a bit of additional process over GitHub but overall not too hard to >> > >> learn). >> > >> >> > >> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >>> I dont know about the other pmc members and committers but I prefer >> > just >> > >>> making Gerrit the only way to submit patches rather than one of many. >> > It >> > >>> seems to work well for Asterix and Kudu. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >>
