> > You could do actual whitelisting too, but remember that > Gerrit itself adds a number of footers that would also have to be > whitelisted.
This was what I was thinking- anyway not strictly necessary for this proposal. > Ok, I officially propose > Ext-ref: MB-12345 +1 looks good to me On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 7:35 PM Chris Hillery <chill...@hillery.land> wrote: > Ok, I officially propose > > Ext-ref: MB-12345 > > (X-ref: IMHO looks too much like the "X-foo" email headers, which are > deprecated by rfc6648 and which might lead some to think the field name is > just "ref".) > > As to whitelisting the footer names: For commits to restricted branches, > whitelisting wouldn't be strictly necessary - if someone typos the footer > name, then the restriction check will fail because it will think there's no > ticket reference. For commits to master and other non-restricted branches, > we agreed that there is value in those having links to Couchbase tickets if > there is one, so you could have automation that posts a comment (but not a > negative vote) if neither an ASTERIXDB-xxxx reference nor an Ext-ref: > footer exists. You could do actual whitelisting too, but remember that > Gerrit itself adds a number of footers that would also have to be > whitelisted. > > Ceej > aka Chris Hillery > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 11:32 AM Michael Blow <mblow.apa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > "Fixes" seems weird to me, since what we list here would not be *DB > issues. > > > > External-ref seems a bit strange only in that "external" is written out > and > > "ref" is > > abbreviated, and External-Reference: is just long. > > > > Either of X-ref: or Ext-ref: seem reasonable to me, if we want to keep CB > > out of > > it. Otherwise, CB-ref: seems like it might be not bad either, since it > > would be clear > > what the reference is. I don't think this would be inherently > > inappropriate- we > > could consider and allow other specific references in the future should > > they be > > requested. > > > > OOC- if we come to a decision, should we add some Jenkins check to ensure > > that any trailers specified are whitelisted? It might be good to catch > > typos and > > prevent malformed trailers. > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 10:14 PM Ian Maxon <ima...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > It seems fine to me, +1. We already have the Contrib vote axis in > Gerrit > > > so there is precedent there. It isn't a requirement either if it > doesn't > > > reference any external issue that is known by the author or reviewer, > so > > it > > > is not onerous. > > > > > > I think it is important to keep things agnostic to the consumer > however, > > so > > > using something like External-ref:, X-ref, or Fixes: would be my > > > preference. It keeps the source free of mentions of non-AsterixDB > > > downstream projects, which I think is desirable and something that also > > has > > > precedent (Contrib flag, stabilization-* branches, etc.) > > > > > > On Jun 4, 2024 at 19:07:12, Chris Hillery <chill...@hillery.land> > wrote: > > > > > > > We'd like to have a semi-formal process by which *DB commits could > > > > reference third-party Jira tickets or other external references. This > > > would > > > > be a "footer" field similar to the Change-Id: footer already required > > by > > > > Gerrit - a line by itself at the end of the commit message, separated > > > from > > > > the body by a blank line. I believe it could be either before or > after > > > the > > > > current Change-Id: footer, and it should not be separated from the > > > > Change-Id: footer by an additional blank line. > > > > > > > > The immediate need is for a way to refer to Couchbase tickets that > > > require > > > > *DB changes, so one approach would be to introduce a footer like > > > > > > > > CB-Xref: MB-12345 > > > > > > > > We could also use a more generic footer name like External-ref:, > > X-ref:, > > > or > > > > even Fixes: . > > > > > > > > The intent is that this footer would be required, and checked by > > > > automation, for commits made to certain "restricted" branches that > are > > > used > > > > to deliver to Couchbase. This includes both commits that are proposed > > > first > > > > to these restricted branches, and for changes that are backported to > > > those > > > > branches. > > > > > > > > It would be encouraged to include such a footer for commits made to > > > > non-restricted branches whenever there is a downstream ticket > > associated > > > > with the change, but not mandated. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ceej > > > > aka Chris Hillery > > > > > > > > > >
