> On May 19, 2015, at 9:59 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I must urge not to try to maintain a changelog by hand.
I should not have used the term changelog. I am used to do this in libcloud: https://github.com/apache/libcloud/blob/trunk/CHANGES.rst it’s just a good habit. You make a commit, you write a line in the file, with a pointer to the PR or the JIRA bug and a short description. It saves having to struggle for changes at release time (jira filters seem to break etc and not everything gets to JIRA…as we are discussing) So I am not asking for an overly complex process, I am just saying: -when you commit something, you write a one line in a text file with a ref to somewhere - -seb > it is error prone > and if people follow Erik's guideline of giving reason in a commit message > creating one from the git log becomes easy. It will be a matter of deleting > the irrelevant from the git log output. > > Op di 19 mei 2015 om 09:53 schreef Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>: > >> Hi, >> >> I think having JIRA references for bug tickets is useful for tracking >> fixes and should be encouraged, though for minor fixes it may be avoided. >> >> I also like the idea of maintaining the changelog every time a developer >> adds a new change instead of updating it at the time of release. >> >> I guess, without introducing a rule, we should encourage a guideline to >> encourage better commit messages, jira references, people updating >> changelog frequently and squashing large number of commits or merging as >> branch instead of fast forward merge. >> >> IMO I feel I’m seeing more important changes in recent months (such as >> more PRs, people waiting on Travis to go green, a lot of refactoring work >> and bugfixes) and don’t want to see anything applied that adds significant >> overhead in terms of developer/contributor/reviewer time. >> >> About PRs: In the past, I have had to do extra work to find the source >> repository and then add it as remote on my local git repo and then do the >> merge. So, if you’re a committer please push the branch on asf origin and >> send PR using that asf origin/branch which could make merging branches >> easier. >> >> Nowadays to speed up reviewing, once I’m done reviewing a PR I use a git >> alias to which I give the github pr link and it automatically commits the >> patch: https://github.com/bhaisaab/dotfiles/blob/master/git/gitconfig#L46 >> (Usage: git pr :url). >> >>> On 18-May-2015, at 10:39 am, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> I am also in favor of text changelog in the root. >>> >>> Creating JIRA for everything may lead to bad tickets anyway. >>> >>> What is also nice is a quick changelog. The habit would be for everyone >> to remember to update the change log when they do a commit (and agree on a >> format for it)... >>> >>> >>> >>>> On May 18, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues < >> wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Okay, >>>> >>>> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well. >>>> >>>> Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on 4.6 - and are already >> documented - I will just create 2 issues so we have a way of keeping track >> of them. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Wilder >>>> >>>> >>>> On 18 May 2015, at 11:16, Stephen Turner <stephen.tur...@citrix.com >> <mailto:stephen.tur...@citrix.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Speaking for my XenCenter team again, for things like that we would >> have an improvement ticket, pointing to the wiki page. >>>> >>>> By the way, this also allows us to schedule the work on our sprint, but >> we had the policy even before we were doing Scrum. In a large, distributed, >> volunteer organisation, I would argue that it's even more important to be >> able to trace the change back to its reason, now and later. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Stephen Turner >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com] >>>> Sent: 18 May 2015 10:11 >>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org> >>>> Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6 >>>> >>>> Hi there, >>>> >>>> I agree with the Jira ticket for the "new features, important fixes, >> security fixes" >>>> >>>> But I don’t think only about "new features, important fixes, security >> fixes”. I put most of my time in make the code better and tested, for what >> we call refactoring/rewriting/redesigning. Should we also create Jira >> issues for that and mark them as Improvement? >>>> >>>> Taking into account the [VPC] Virtual Router, Citrix Resource Base and >> Libvirt Computing Resource refactoring, we had only internal issues on >> Jira. However, the changes have been documented on the 4.5/4.6 sections of >> the Apache / Developers / Design Documents wiki: >>>> >>>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Refactor+for+Redundant+Virtual+Router+Implementation >>>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Refactoring+XenServer+Hypervisor+Plugin >>>> >>>> The Libvirt documentation is on its way, since the PR was pushed only >> last week. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Wilder >>>> >>>> >>>> On 18 May 2015, at 10:39, Stephen Turner <stephen.tur...@citrix.com >> <mailto:stephen.tur...@citrix.com><mailto:stephen.tur...@citrix.com>> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> In my XenCenter dev team at Citrix, we have the policy of requiring a >> ticket number on every commit. If we find a bug and there isn't already a >> ticket, we create a ticket before committing the fix. I guess I've just dug >> through history too many times to understand why something that appears >> wrong was done, only to find an inadequate description at the end of the >> trail. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Stephen Turner >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com] >>>> Sent: 18 May 2015 09:32 >>>> To: dev >>>> Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6 >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net >> <mailto:m...@renemoser.net><mailto:m...@renemoser.net>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> On 15.05.2015 11:27, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: >>>> Folks, >>>> >>>> As we prepare to try a new process for 4.6 release it would be nice to >> start paying attention to master. >>>> >>>> - Good commit messages >>>> >>>> The question is, what makes a commit message good? Maybe this helps: >>>> >>>> http://secure-web.cisco.com/1cOtAU9lruLvoJl9SBdNSTHN6eyvml6nO5JlwT8_V2 >>>> d_Y7wsnHAV3NiHTOya0cRQyt1WuG_fzithwjk4Qu-l3usM-B_yzy7V4qaxtoDIlEixysid >>>> QZ0ZbuK0YMNgknwBUaRUBJYNkjfGoppsXIpUXcmRvOH565otFMCmJUX2mfkrj_z5Vwm0wh >>>> PDqu2ZkGk1a/http%3A%2F%2Fchris.beams.io%2Fposts%2Fgit-commit%2F >>>> >>>> - Reference to a JIRA bug >>>> >>>> Must there be a JIRA bug? I did some commits without jira bugs in the >> past. But I noticed that those are not "tracked" in the changelog of the >> new release. So should there be a policy (is there?) that there must be a >> jira bug for fixes? >>>> >>>> >>>> I believe there should be a JIRA bug for most things. JIRA is a good >> place to document why you're doing something, it's also easy to use as a >> source for release notes as you discovered. >>>> It's also good practice to document bugs/fixes, it's generally easier >> to find JIRA bugs than it is to find commit messages - especially for >> non-developers / newbies. >>>> >>>> For major code commits (new features, important fixes, security fixes) >> I'd say it should be a requirement, but I don't know if it already is or >> not. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - Squashing commits ( cc/ wilder :)) >>>> >>>> This really depends. I would not generally prefer squashing commits. >>>> >>>> The example of >>>> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commits/master?page=2 is more an >> example of "bad" commit messages. >>>> >>>> If you look at the commits, they make sense but the commit message >> indicates that they cover similar work in different aspects, which they >> actually don't. >>>> >>>> But if you look at this example here >>>> >>>> https://github.com/ansible/ansible-modules-extras/commits/devel?author >>>> =gregdek where you can see dozens of similar commits, those should be >> squashed. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> +1 to squashing related commits where it makes sense to do so >>>> -1 to a general rule of squashing the whole PR >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Erik >>>> >>> >> >> Regards, >> Rohit Yadav >> Software Architect, ShapeBlue >> M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com >> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab >> >> >> >> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services >> >> IaaS Cloud Design & Build< >> http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//> >> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/> >> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/> >> CloudStack Software Engineering< >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/> >> CloudStack Infrastructure Support< >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/> >> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses< >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/> >> >> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended >> solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or >> opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily >> represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the >> intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based >> upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender >> if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a >> company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a >> company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue >> Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil >> and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is >> a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under >> license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark. >>
