OFBiz contributions & Github Pull Requests

[Michael Brohl-3]

There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the pull
requests will be written to the commit history using the timestamp of
the original commits.

So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in the
codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.

This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
changes.

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de


Michael Brohl
Geschäftsführer

Fon      [phone]
Fax      [phone]
Mobil    [phone]
Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl

Company and Management Headquarters:
ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de

Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl

Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:

> Hi All,
>
> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with commits
> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do with
> the commit message (as defined in
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
> ).
> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this commit
> message appears in:
>
>     1. the OFBiz repo
>     2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
>     3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the commit
>     section, see e.g. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
>
> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly occurring
> blog posts of the project.
>
> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more and
> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their code
> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there issue
> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community members
> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
>
> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor - or
> in git parlance: the author).
>
> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of his
> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template there
> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which is the
> evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
>
> Is my assessment so far correct?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without privileges)
> since 2008*
> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-3]

My preference is to lean on GitHub because it is an accepted and common way
for ASF projects to get contributions and because it is very popular among
contributors.
There are still many details (including the one about PR mentioned by
Michael) to fine tune but I am confident that we will find a good solution
for them.

Jacopo

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:03 AM Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the pull
> requests will be written to the commit history using the timestamp of
> the original commits.
>
> So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in the
> codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.
>
> This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
> changes.
>
> Michael Brohl
>
> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>
>
> Michael Brohl
> Geschäftsführer
>
> Fon      [phone]
> Fax      [phone]
> Mobil    [phone]
> Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>
> Company and Management Headquarters:
> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
> Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de
>
> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>
> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with commits
> > from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
> > If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do with
> > the commit message (as defined in
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
> > ).
> > After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this commit
> > message appears in:
> >
> >     1. the OFBiz repo
> >     2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
> >     3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the commit
> >     section, see e.g. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
> >
> > Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly occurring
> > blog posts of the project.
> >
> > With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more and
> > more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their code
> > changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there
> issue
> > a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community members
> > and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
> >
> > A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor - or
> > in git parlance: the author).
> >
> > So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of his
> > commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template there
> > is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which is
> the
> > evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
> >
> > Is my assessment so far correct?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> > Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> > *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without
> privileges)
> > since 2008*
> > Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >
>
>

[Nicolas Malin-2]

Hi,

On 13/02/2020 08:03, Michael Brohl wrote:
> There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the
> pull requests will be written to the commit history using the
> timestamp of the original commits.
>
> So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in
> the codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.

Michael, you have an example of this case ?

Normally, when you merge or cherry pick, we have two dates, author date
(commit origin) and the commit date. If I check the git history with the
last Jacques's commit by PR I found :

    $ git log --pretty=fuller -n1 e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4
      commit e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4 (HEAD -> trunk,
origin/trunk, origin/HEAD)
      Author:     Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
      AuthorDate: Tue Feb 11 10:24:10 2020 +0100
      Commit:     Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
      CommitDate: Wed Feb 12 12:09:34 2020 +0100

By default, the author date is displaying and the commit date is use to
ordering.

Nicolas

>
> This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
> changes.
>
> Michael Brohl
>
> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>
>
> Michael Brohl
> Geschäftsführer
>
> Fon      [phone]
> Fax      [phone]
> Mobil    [phone]
> Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>
> Company and Management Headquarters:
> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
> Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de
>
> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>
> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with
>> commits
>> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
>> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do
>> with
>> the commit message (as defined in
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
>>
>> ).
>> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this commit
>> message appears in:
>>
>>     1. the OFBiz repo
>>     2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
>>     3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the commit
>>     section, see e.g. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
>>
>> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly occurring
>> blog posts of the project.
>>
>> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more and
>> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their code
>> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there
>> issue
>> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community members
>> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
>>
>> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor
>> - or
>> in git parlance: the author).
>>
>> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of his
>> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template
>> there
>> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which
>> is the
>> evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
>>
>> Is my assessment so far correct?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without
>> privileges)
>> since 2008*
>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>>
>

[Michael Brohl-3]

Hi Nicolas,

your are correct, I checked the history again and this seems to work
fine, using the committed date for the history. Thank you for the
explanation.

While checking I found another thing which confuses me: there are
commits in the history which seem not to be from an OFBiz committer
(hope I did not miss anything here).

Please see the screenshot here:
https://share.ecomify.de/download.php?id=3&token=4dmjDN050Jz1q0I1uvI4foUdW8ZhxnTT 


Looks like commits from another branch, see the non-linear history.
Maybe Jacques has an explanation for it?

Thanks,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de


Am 13.02.20 um 10:40 schrieb Nicolas Malin:

> Hi,
>
> On 13/02/2020 08:03, Michael Brohl wrote:
>> There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the
>> pull requests will be written to the commit history using the
>> timestamp of the original commits.
>>
>> So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in
>> the codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.
> Michael, you have an example of this case ?
>
> Normally, when you merge or cherry pick, we have two dates, author date
> (commit origin) and the commit date. If I check the git history with the
> last Jacques's commit by PR I found :
>
>      $ git log --pretty=fuller -n1 e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4
>        commit e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4 (HEAD -> trunk,
> origin/trunk, origin/HEAD)
>        Author:     Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
>        AuthorDate: Tue Feb 11 10:24:10 2020 +0100
>        Commit:     Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
>        CommitDate: Wed Feb 12 12:09:34 2020 +0100
>
> By default, the author date is displaying and the commit date is use to
> ordering.
>
> Nicolas
>
>> This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
>> changes.
>>
>> Michael Brohl
>>
>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>
>>
>> Michael Brohl
>> Geschäftsführer
>>
>> Fon      [phone]
>> Fax      [phone]
>> Mobil    [phone]
>> Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
>> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>>
>> Company and Management Headquarters:
>> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
>> Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de
>>
>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
>> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>>
>> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with
>>> commits
>>> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
>>> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do
>>> with
>>> the commit message (as defined in
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
>>>
>>> ).
>>> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this commit
>>> message appears in:
>>>
>>>      1. the OFBiz repo
>>>      2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
>>>      3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the commit
>>>      section, see e.g. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
>>>
>>> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly occurring
>>> blog posts of the project.
>>>
>>> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more and
>>> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their code
>>> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there
>>> issue
>>> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community members
>>> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
>>>
>>> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor
>>> - or
>>> in git parlance: the author).
>>>
>>> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of his
>>> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template
>>> there
>>> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which
>>> is the
>>> evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
>>>
>>> Is my assessment so far correct?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
>>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without
>>> privileges)
>>> since 2008*
>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>>>

[Daniel Watford]

Hi Michael,

Those are the commits from my feature branch, coming in as a consequence of
merging my PR.

I imagine merging PRs from contributors will always run into this issue.

One possible solution would be for a committer to checkout the PR (branch),
generate a patch file, and then apply the patch to their own trunk branch.

This would allow the committer a chance to affect the commit comments too,
and would have the same effect as squashing a lot of commits.

I'm sure there would be some git magic plus scripting to accomplish this,
potentially collecting the comments from the PR commits as presenting them
to the committer as a suggested commit message.

The downside is that PRs wouldn't be merged as the contributions they carry
would have been merged via a different channel.

Dan.

On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 10:04, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Nicolas,
>
> your are correct, I checked the history again and this seems to work
> fine, using the committed date for the history. Thank you for the
> explanation.
>
> While checking I found another thing which confuses me: there are
> commits in the history which seem not to be from an OFBiz committer
> (hope I did not miss anything here).
>
> Please see the screenshot here:
>
> https://share.ecomify.de/download.php?id=3&token=4dmjDN050Jz1q0I1uvI4foUdW8ZhxnTT
>
>
> Looks like commits from another branch, see the non-linear history.
> Maybe Jacques has an explanation for it?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael Brohl
>
> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>
>
> Am 13.02.20 um 10:40 schrieb Nicolas Malin:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 13/02/2020 08:03, Michael Brohl wrote:
> >> There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the
> >> pull requests will be written to the commit history using the
> >> timestamp of the original commits.
> >>
> >> So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in
> >> the codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.
> > Michael, you have an example of this case ?
> >
> > Normally, when you merge or cherry pick, we have two dates, author date
> > (commit origin) and the commit date. If I check the git history with the
> > last Jacques's commit by PR I found :
> >
> >      $ git log --pretty=fuller -n1
> e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4
> >        commit e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4 (HEAD -> trunk,
> > origin/trunk, origin/HEAD)
> >        Author:     Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> >        AuthorDate: Tue Feb 11 10:24:10 2020 +0100
> >        Commit:     Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
> >        CommitDate: Wed Feb 12 12:09:34 2020 +0100
> >
> > By default, the author date is displaying and the commit date is use to
> > ordering.
> >
> > Nicolas
> >
> >> This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
> >> changes.
> >>
> >> Michael Brohl
> >>
> >> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> >>
> >>
> >> Michael Brohl
> >> Geschäftsführer
> >>
> >> Fon      [phone]
> >> Fax      [phone]
> >> Mobil    [phone]
> >> Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
> >> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
> >>
> >> Company and Management Headquarters:
> >> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
> >> Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de
> >>
> >> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
> >> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
> >>
> >> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with
> >>> commits
> >>> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
> >>> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do
> >>> with
> >>> the commit message (as defined in
> >>>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
> >>>
> >>> ).
> >>> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this commit
> >>> message appears in:
> >>>
> >>>      1. the OFBiz repo
> >>>      2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
> >>>      3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the commit
> >>>      section, see e.g.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
> >>>
> >>> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly occurring
> >>> blog posts of the project.
> >>>
> >>> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more and
> >>> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their
> code
> >>> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there
> >>> issue
> >>> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community
> members
> >>> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
> >>>
> >>> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor
> >>> - or
> >>> in git parlance: the author).
> >>>
> >>> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of his
> >>> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template
> >>> there
> >>> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which
> >>> is the
> >>> evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
> >>>
> >>> Is my assessment so far correct?
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> Pierre Smits
> >>>
> >>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> >>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> >>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> >>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without
> >>> privileges)
> >>> since 2008*
> >>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >>>
>
>

--
Daniel Watford

[Pierre Smits-3]

Currently, a change to the codebase and contributed through a PullRequest
(and patch files too) need to be manually reviewed (vetted) and tested by
privileged contributors. Fortunately with PullRequests, part of the vetting
is done through the integration of Sonarcloud (see the comment in the PR,
e.g. https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/14).

Testing of a PR (to see whether it breaks the code, passes the integration
tests) can also be done before a privileged contributor does his thing. The
PullRequest can be checked out by the CI and subsequently build the
check-out and run the integration tests. And the result of such can be
added as a comment to the PR.

Then either the author reworks his contribution (when SonarCloud quality
gates weren't passed, or build or test flaws appears), or the privileged
contributor merges the commit into the appropriate branch(es).

For the project, this would mean a workload reduction, and an opportunity
(for everyone) to focus on on the more important stuff.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits
*Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
<https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008

*Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
*Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer


On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 11:18 AM Daniel Watford <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> Those are the commits from my feature branch, coming in as a consequence of
> merging my PR.
>
> I imagine merging PRs from contributors will always run into this issue.
>
> One possible solution would be for a committer to checkout the PR (branch),
> generate a patch file, and then apply the patch to their own trunk branch.
>
> This would allow the committer a chance to affect the commit comments too,
> and would have the same effect as squashing a lot of commits.
>
> I'm sure there would be some git magic plus scripting to accomplish this,
> potentially collecting the comments from the PR commits as presenting them
> to the committer as a suggested commit message.
>
> The downside is that PRs wouldn't be merged as the contributions they carry
> would have been merged via a different channel.
>
> Dan.
>
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 10:04, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Nicolas,
> >
> > your are correct, I checked the history again and this seems to work
> > fine, using the committed date for the history. Thank you for the
> > explanation.
> >
> > While checking I found another thing which confuses me: there are
> > commits in the history which seem not to be from an OFBiz committer
> > (hope I did not miss anything here).
> >
> > Please see the screenshot here:
> >
> >
> https://share.ecomify.de/download.php?id=3&token=4dmjDN050Jz1q0I1uvI4foUdW8ZhxnTT
> >
> >
> > Looks like commits from another branch, see the non-linear history.
> > Maybe Jacques has an explanation for it?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Michael Brohl
> >
> > ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> >
> >
> > Am 13.02.20 um 10:40 schrieb Nicolas Malin:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 13/02/2020 08:03, Michael Brohl wrote:
> > >> There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the
> > >> pull requests will be written to the commit history using the
> > >> timestamp of the original commits.
> > >>
> > >> So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in
> > >> the codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.
> > > Michael, you have an example of this case ?
> > >
> > > Normally, when you merge or cherry pick, we have two dates, author date
> > > (commit origin) and the commit date. If I check the git history with
> the
> > > last Jacques's commit by PR I found :
> > >
> > >      $ git log --pretty=fuller -n1
> > e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4
> > >        commit e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4 (HEAD -> trunk,
> > > origin/trunk, origin/HEAD)
> > >        Author:     Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> > >        AuthorDate: Tue Feb 11 10:24:10 2020 +0100
> > >        Commit:     Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
> > >        CommitDate: Wed Feb 12 12:09:34 2020 +0100
> > >
> > > By default, the author date is displaying and the commit date is use to
> > > ordering.
> > >
> > > Nicolas
> > >
> > >> This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
> > >> changes.
> > >>
> > >> Michael Brohl
> > >>
> > >> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Michael Brohl
> > >> Geschäftsführer
> > >>
> > >> Fon      [phone]
> > >> Fax      [phone]
> > >> Mobil    [phone]
> > >> Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
> > >> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
> > >>
> > >> Company and Management Headquarters:
> > >> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
> > >> Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de
> > >>
> > >> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
> > >> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
> > >>
> > >> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> > >>> Hi All,
> > >>>
> > >>> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with
> > >>> commits
> > >>> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
> > >>> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do
> > >>> with
> > >>> the commit message (as defined in
> > >>>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
> > >>>
> > >>> ).
> > >>> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this
> commit
> > >>> message appears in:
> > >>>
> > >>>      1. the OFBiz repo
> > >>>      2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
> > >>>      3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the
> commit
> > >>>      section, see e.g.
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
> > >>>
> > >>> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly
> occurring
> > >>> blog posts of the project.
> > >>>
> > >>> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more
> and
> > >>> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their
> > code
> > >>> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there
> > >>> issue
> > >>> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community
> > members
> > >>> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
> > >>>
> > >>> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor
> > >>> - or
> > >>> in git parlance: the author).
> > >>>
> > >>> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of
> his
> > >>> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template
> > >>> there
> > >>> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which
> > >>> is the
> > >>> evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
> > >>>
> > >>> Is my assessment so far correct?
> > >>>
> > >>> Best regards,
> > >>>
> > >>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>
> > >>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> > >>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> > >>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> > >>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without
> > >>> privileges)
> > >>> since 2008*
> > >>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> > >>>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Daniel Watford
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thanks Daniel,

I think the best (for now at least) is to follow the advices (WIP) of the special page we have for that in wiki[1]

This is what I have in my local config:

[remote "origin"]
     url = https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz-framework.git
     fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/*
     fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*

Then I have all the PRs at hand and I can cherry-pick changes from remote PR branches and commit/push then directly

We get something like https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-framework.git;a=commit;h=e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4

How does that show in your tree Michael? Last time, the one your image shows, on GitHub I did a PR squash and merge, which is surely not the best way.

Jacques

[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributing+via+Git+and+Github++-+WIP#ContributingviaGitandGithub-WIP-HandlingaPullRequest(forcommitters)


Le 13/02/2020 à 11:18, Daniel Watford a écrit :

> Hi Michael,
>
> Those are the commits from my feature branch, coming in as a consequence of
> merging my PR.
>
> I imagine merging PRs from contributors will always run into this issue.
>
> One possible solution would be for a committer to checkout the PR (branch),
> generate a patch file, and then apply the patch to their own trunk branch.
>
> This would allow the committer a chance to affect the commit comments too,
> and would have the same effect as squashing a lot of commits.
>
> I'm sure there would be some git magic plus scripting to accomplish this,
> potentially collecting the comments from the PR commits as presenting them
> to the committer as a suggested commit message.
>
> The downside is that PRs wouldn't be merged as the contributions they carry
> would have been merged via a different channel.
>
> Dan.
>
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 10:04, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nicolas,
>>
>> your are correct, I checked the history again and this seems to work
>> fine, using the committed date for the history. Thank you for the
>> explanation.
>>
>> While checking I found another thing which confuses me: there are
>> commits in the history which seem not to be from an OFBiz committer
>> (hope I did not miss anything here).
>>
>> Please see the screenshot here:
>>
>> https://share.ecomify.de/download.php?id=3&token=4dmjDN050Jz1q0I1uvI4foUdW8ZhxnTT
>>
>>
>> Looks like commits from another branch, see the non-linear history.
>> Maybe Jacques has an explanation for it?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael Brohl
>>
>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>
>>
>> Am 13.02.20 um 10:40 schrieb Nicolas Malin:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 13/02/2020 08:03, Michael Brohl wrote:
>>>> There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the
>>>> pull requests will be written to the commit history using the
>>>> timestamp of the original commits.
>>>>
>>>> So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in
>>>> the codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.
>>> Michael, you have an example of this case ?
>>>
>>> Normally, when you merge or cherry pick, we have two dates, author date
>>> (commit origin) and the commit date. If I check the git history with the
>>> last Jacques's commit by PR I found :
>>>
>>>       $ git log --pretty=fuller -n1
>> e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4
>>>         commit e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4 (HEAD -> trunk,
>>> origin/trunk, origin/HEAD)
>>>         Author:     Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
>>>         AuthorDate: Tue Feb 11 10:24:10 2020 +0100
>>>         Commit:     Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
>>>         CommitDate: Wed Feb 12 12:09:34 2020 +0100
>>>
>>> By default, the author date is displaying and the commit date is use to
>>> ordering.
>>>
>>> Nicolas
>>>
>>>> This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
>>>> changes.
>>>>
>>>> Michael Brohl
>>>>
>>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Michael Brohl
>>>> Geschäftsführer
>>>>
>>>> Fon      [phone]
>>>> Fax      [phone]
>>>> Mobil    [phone]
>>>> Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
>>>> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>>>>
>>>> Company and Management Headquarters:
>>>> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
>>>> Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de
>>>>
>>>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
>>>> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>>>>
>>>> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with
>>>>> commits
>>>>> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
>>>>> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do
>>>>> with
>>>>> the commit message (as defined in
>>>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
>>>>> ).
>>>>> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this commit
>>>>> message appears in:
>>>>>
>>>>>       1. the OFBiz repo
>>>>>       2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
>>>>>       3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the commit
>>>>>       section, see e.g.
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
>>>>> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly occurring
>>>>> blog posts of the project.
>>>>>
>>>>> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more and
>>>>> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their
>> code
>>>>> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there
>>>>> issue
>>>>> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community
>> members
>>>>> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
>>>>>
>>>>> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor
>>>>> - or
>>>>> in git parlance: the author).
>>>>>
>>>>> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of his
>>>>> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template
>>>>> there
>>>>> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which
>>>>> is the
>>>>> evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is my assessment so far correct?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>
>>>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
>>>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
>>>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
>>>>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without
>>>>> privileges)
>>>>> since 2008*
>>>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>>>>>
>>

[Pierre Smits-3]

Currently, notifications regarding a PullRequest are only sent to a
selected few in our community, nor do they appear to be referenced in the
appropriate ticket(s). This is not a good thing as it deprives the rest of
the community of the opportunity to collaborate.

We should work to get this improved. Who will take the lead (together with
INFRA, if need be)?

Best regards,

Pierre Smits
*Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
<https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008

*Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
*Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer


On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:02 PM Jacques Le Roux <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks Daniel,
>
> I think the best (for now at least) is to follow the advices (WIP) of the
> special page we have for that in wiki[1]
>
> This is what I have in my local config:
>
> [remote "origin"]
>      url = https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz-framework.git
>      fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/*
>      fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
>
> Then I have all the PRs at hand and I can cherry-pick changes from remote
> PR branches and commit/push then directly
>
> We get something like
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-framework.git;a=commit;h=e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4
>
> How does that show in your tree Michael? Last time, the one your image
> shows, on GitHub I did a PR squash and merge, which is surely not the best
> way.
>
> Jacques
>
> [1]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributing+via+Git+and+Github++-+WIP#ContributingviaGitandGithub-WIP-HandlingaPullRequest(forcommitters)
>
>
> Le 13/02/2020 à 11:18, Daniel Watford a écrit :
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > Those are the commits from my feature branch, coming in as a consequence
> of
> > merging my PR.
> >
> > I imagine merging PRs from contributors will always run into this issue.
> >
> > One possible solution would be for a committer to checkout the PR
> (branch),
> > generate a patch file, and then apply the patch to their own trunk
> branch.
> >
> > This would allow the committer a chance to affect the commit comments
> too,
> > and would have the same effect as squashing a lot of commits.
> >
> > I'm sure there would be some git magic plus scripting to accomplish this,
> > potentially collecting the comments from the PR commits as presenting
> them
> > to the committer as a suggested commit message.
> >
> > The downside is that PRs wouldn't be merged as the contributions they
> carry
> > would have been merged via a different channel.
> >
> > Dan.
> >
> > On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 10:04, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Nicolas,
> >>
> >> your are correct, I checked the history again and this seems to work
> >> fine, using the committed date for the history. Thank you for the
> >> explanation.
> >>
> >> While checking I found another thing which confuses me: there are
> >> commits in the history which seem not to be from an OFBiz committer
> >> (hope I did not miss anything here).
> >>
> >> Please see the screenshot here:
> >>
> >>
> https://share.ecomify.de/download.php?id=3&token=4dmjDN050Jz1q0I1uvI4foUdW8ZhxnTT
> >>
> >>
> >> Looks like commits from another branch, see the non-linear history.
> >> Maybe Jacques has an explanation for it?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Michael Brohl
> >>
> >> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 13.02.20 um 10:40 schrieb Nicolas Malin:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 13/02/2020 08:03, Michael Brohl wrote:
> >>>> There is one drawback with PR's I just noticed: the commits of the
> >>>> pull requests will be written to the commit history using the
> >>>> timestamp of the original commits.
> >>>>
> >>>> So if the commits were written a month ago and a committer merges in
> >>>> the codebase now, it appears in the history a month ago.
> >>> Michael, you have an example of this case ?
> >>>
> >>> Normally, when you merge or cherry pick, we have two dates, author date
> >>> (commit origin) and the commit date. If I check the git history with
> the
> >>> last Jacques's commit by PR I found :
> >>>
> >>>       $ git log --pretty=fuller -n1
> >> e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4
> >>>         commit e1e1a4813d05f236ea851c729d3b01f5c2ff44a4 (HEAD -> trunk,
> >>> origin/trunk, origin/HEAD)
> >>>         Author:     Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> >>>         AuthorDate: Tue Feb 11 10:24:10 2020 +0100
> >>>         Commit:     Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
> >>>         CommitDate: Wed Feb 12 12:09:34 2020 +0100
> >>>
> >>> By default, the author date is displaying and the commit date is use to
> >>> ordering.
> >>>
> >>> Nicolas
> >>>
> >>>> This might be confusing, at least when retracing problems or following
> >>>> changes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Michael Brohl
> >>>>
> >>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Michael Brohl
> >>>> Geschäftsführer
> >>>>
> >>>> Fon      [phone]
> >>>> Fax      [phone]
> >>>> Mobil    [phone]
> >>>> Xing     xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
> >>>> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
> >>>>
> >>>> Company and Management Headquarters:
> >>>> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
> >>>> Fon: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.ecomify.de
> >>>>
> >>>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
> >>>> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 30.01.20 um 14:25 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> >>>>> Hi All,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Recently we saw some postings in various threads how to deal with
> >>>>> commits
> >>>>> from contributors coming via pull requests in Github.
> >>>>> If I understand it correctly, the issue we're dealing with has to do
> >>>>> with
> >>>>> the commit message (as defined in
> >>>>>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
> >>>>> ).
> >>>>> After a code contribution has been accepted by a committer, this
> commit
> >>>>> message appears in:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>       1. the OFBiz repo
> >>>>>       2. a posting to the commit@ mailing list
> >>>>>       3. in the referenced JIRA ticket (as a comment, and in the
> commit
> >>>>>       section, see e.g.
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10954)
> >>>>> Elements of the commit message are also used in the regularly
> occurring
> >>>>> blog posts of the project.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> With our repositories available via Github, we can expect that more
> and
> >>>>> more contributors work within their local clones, and publish their
> >> code
> >>>>> changes (commits) in their own public forks on Github and from there
> >>>>> issue
> >>>>> a pull request to get these contributions evaluated by community
> >> members
> >>>>> and when good incorporated into the OFBiz repositories.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A pull request can contain one or more commits (from the contributor
> >>>>> - or
> >>>>> in git parlance: the author).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, when the commit message by the contributor (author) of each of
> his
> >>>>> commits is formatted in accordance with the commit-message template
> >>>>> there
> >>>>> is nothing that stands in the way to take it to the next step. Which
> >>>>> is the
> >>>>> evaluation of the contribution by other community members.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is my assessment so far correct?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> >>>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> >>>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> >>>>> *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without
> >>>>> privileges)
> >>>>> since 2008*
> >>>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >>>>>
> >>
>

[Nicolas Malin-2]

Hi,

On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:

Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In order
to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
configuration of the local clone:

fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/*


Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.

After some tries I propose to use

   fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*

instead of

   fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/*

The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list all pull request (closed included)

Nicolas

   

[Pierre Smits-3]

Hi Nicolas,

Your suggestion to show only open PRs is way better.

I will update the page.

Thanks!

Best regards,

Pierre Smits
*Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
<https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008

*Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
*Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer


On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi,
> On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:
>
> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In order
> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
> configuration of the local clone:
>
> fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>
>
> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.
>
> After some tries I propose to use
>
>    fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*
>
> instead of
>
>    fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>
> The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list all
> pull request (closed included)
>
> Nicolas
>
>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques

Le 14/02/2020 à 12:29, Pierre Smits a écrit :

> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Your suggestion to show only open PRs is way better.
>
> I will update the page.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
> *Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
> <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
>
> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>
>> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In order
>> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
>> configuration of the local clone:
>>
>> fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>>
>>
>> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
>> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.
>>
>> After some tries I propose to use
>>
>>     fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*
>>
>> instead of
>>
>>     fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>>
>> The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list all
>> pull request (closed included)
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>>
>>

[Pierre Smits-3]

Hi All,

It seems feedback on the 'Contributing via Git and Github' page in our wiki
has subsided. Shortly I will apply lazy consensus to remove its WiP status.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Pierre Smits
*Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008

*Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
*Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer


On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jacques Le Roux <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 14/02/2020 à 12:29, Pierre Smits a écrit :
> > Hi Nicolas,
> >
> > Your suggestion to show only open PRs is way better.
> >
> > I will update the page.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> > *Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
> > <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >
> > *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> > Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> > Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>
> >> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In
> order
> >> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
> >> configuration of the local clone:
> >>
> >> fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
> >>
> >>
> >> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
> >> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.
> >>
> >> After some tries I propose to use
> >>
> >>     fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*
> >>
> >> instead of
> >>
> >>     fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
> >>
> >> The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list all
> >> pull request (closed included)
> >>
> >> Nicolas
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>

[Michael Brohl-3]

I made a comment just yesterday. The page needs review and this might
take some time.

Michael


Am 21.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Pierre Smits:

> Hi All,
>
> It seems feedback on the 'Contributing via Git and Github' page in our wiki
> has subsided. Shortly I will apply lazy consensus to remove its WiP status.
>
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Pierre Smits
> *Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
> OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
>
> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jacques Le Roux <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 14/02/2020 à 12:29, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>>> Hi Nicolas,
>>>
>>> Your suggestion to show only open PRs is way better.
>>>
>>> I will update the page.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>> *Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
>>> <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
>>>
>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In
>> order
>>>> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
>>>> configuration of the local clone:
>>>>
>>>> fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
>>>> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.
>>>>
>>>> After some tries I propose to use
>>>>
>>>>      fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*
>>>>
>>>> instead of
>>>>
>>>>      fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>>>>
>>>> The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list all
>>>> pull request (closed included)
>>>>
>>>> Nicolas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>

[Pierre Smits-3]

@Michal,

Your comments have been addressed and noted. You can continue to review,
discuss and suggest changes...

Met vriendelijke groet,

Pierre Smits
*Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008

*Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
*Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer


On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 9:24 AM Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I made a comment just yesterday. The page needs review and this might
> take some time.
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 21.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > It seems feedback on the 'Contributing via Git and Github' page in our
> wiki
> > has subsided. Shortly I will apply lazy consensus to remove its WiP
> status.
> >
> > Met vriendelijke groet,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> > *Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
> > OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >
> > *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> > Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> > Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jacques Le Roux <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Jacques
> >>
> >> Le 14/02/2020 à 12:29, Pierre Smits a écrit :
> >>> Hi Nicolas,
> >>>
> >>> Your suggestion to show only open PRs is way better.
> >>>
> >>> I will update the page.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> Pierre Smits
> >>> *Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
> >>> <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >>>
> >>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> >>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> >>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> >>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Nicolas Malin <
> [hidden email]
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>> On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In
> >> order
> >>>> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
> >>>> configuration of the local clone:
> >>>>
> >>>> fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
> >>>> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.
> >>>>
> >>>> After some tries I propose to use
> >>>>
> >>>>      fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*
> >>>>
> >>>> instead of
> >>>>
> >>>>      fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
> >>>>
> >>>> The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list
> all
> >>>> pull request (closed included)
> >>>>
> >>>> Nicolas
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
>
>

[Michael Brohl-3]

It seems you just removed the work in progess notes from the page
without waiting for the review I've announced.

The page should be marked as WIP until we agree on the processes
described there, IMO.

Thanks,

Michael


Am 22.02.20 um 08:59 schrieb Pierre Smits:

> @Michal,
>
> Your comments have been addressed and noted. You can continue to review,
> discuss and suggest changes...
>
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Pierre Smits
> *Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
> OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
>
> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 9:24 AM Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> I made a comment just yesterday. The page needs review and this might
>> take some time.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 21.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Pierre Smits:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> It seems feedback on the 'Contributing via Git and Github' page in our
>> wiki
>>> has subsided. Shortly I will apply lazy consensus to remove its WiP
>> status.
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>> *Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
>>> OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
>>>
>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jacques Le Roux <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>> Le 14/02/2020 à 12:29, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>>>>> Hi Nicolas,
>>>>>
>>>>> Your suggestion to show only open PRs is way better.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will update the page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>> *Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
>>>>> <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
>>>>>
>>>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
>>>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
>>>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
>>>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Nicolas Malin <
>> [hidden email]
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In
>>>> order
>>>>>> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
>>>>>> configuration of the local clone:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
>>>>>> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After some tries I propose to use
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> instead of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list
>> all
>>>>>> pull request (closed included)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>

[Pierre Smits-3]

Hi all,

In this thread we discussed improvements to the Contributing via Git and
Github page in Confluence (see [1]). Some were then adamant that the page
should have the WIP status referenced in the subject/title.

However, since then the page hasn't changed. If nothing comes forward in
the coming days, I will remove the WIP status from the subject/title. After
that, contributors can continue to improve the page, like they can improve
any other page that doesn't have the WIP status in the subject/title


[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributing+via+Git+and+Github+-+WIP
Met vriendelijke groet,

Pierre Smits
*Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/> since
2008 (without privileges)

*Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
*Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer


On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:12 AM Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> It seems you just removed the work in progess notes from the page
> without waiting for the review I've announced.
>
> The page should be marked as WIP until we agree on the processes
> described there, IMO.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 22.02.20 um 08:59 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> > @Michal,
> >
> > Your comments have been addressed and noted. You can continue to review,
> > discuss and suggest changes...
> >
> > Met vriendelijke groet,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> > *Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
> > OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >
> > *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> > Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> > Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 9:24 AM Michael Brohl <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I made a comment just yesterday. The page needs review and this might
> >> take some time.
> >>
> >> Michael
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 21.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> It seems feedback on the 'Contributing via Git and Github' page in our
> >> wiki
> >>> has subsided. Shortly I will apply lazy consensus to remove its WiP
> >> status.
> >>> Met vriendelijke groet,
> >>>
> >>> Pierre Smits
> >>> *Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of*
> Apache
> >>> OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >>>
> >>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> >>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> >>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> >>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jacques Le Roux <
> >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> Jacques
> >>>>
> >>>> Le 14/02/2020 à 12:29, Pierre Smits a écrit :
> >>>>> Hi Nicolas,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Your suggestion to show only open PRs is way better.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I will update the page.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>>> *Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
> >>>>> <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> >>>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> >>>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> >>>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Nicolas Malin <
> >> [hidden email]
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>> On 31/01/2020 15:53, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Pull Request available on Github can be seen in the local clone. In
> >>>> order
> >>>>>> to have this working, the following line should be added to the git
> >>>>>> configuration of the local clone:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Preferably this line should exist before the 'fetch =
> >>>>>> +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*' of the 'Github' remote.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> After some tries I propose to use
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>       fetch = +refs/pull/*/merge:refs/remotes/pr/*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> instead of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>       fetch = +refs/pull/**/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/**
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The first list pull request available to merge, and the second list
> >> all
> >>>>>> pull request (closed included)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Nicolas
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>
>
>