Hi,
Well, my initial reaction was also to go for Option 2, because the issue
tracker is not the right place to give credit, it's temporary and that the
code's commit history and PRs is the way to accept people's contributions
and give credit.
However, for the sake of trying to motivate people and have more
contributors/committers (and we need that more IMO than anything else), I`m
voting for Option 1, with the mention that we can have cases when the
author of an accepted PR does not have a jira account so then the committer
closing the issue is forced to assign himself and probably add a comment
saying that the applied the PR authored by X.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:44 PM, vincent(a)massol.net <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
On 26 Nov 2014 at 14:21:48, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) (valicac(a)gmail.com
(mailto:valicac@gmail.com)) wrote:
Hi,
We have discussed this subject multiple times, but we don't have an
official vote and conclusion on the topic.
Problem: In JIRA who is the Assignee of an issue fixed by a Pull Request?
1: Contributor
- he provided the solution
- giving the attributions, the contributor might feel encouraged to
contribute more
- we could do some JIRA statistics on external contributions, but this
use
case can be covered by GitHub statistics
2: Committer
- he does the merging on his account and he becomes responsible for the
committed code.
- in case there are problems, the committer needs to find solution, since
we can't rely on contributors availability
- in doing the PR review, the committer spends a lot of time analyzing
and
testing the provided solution
We are talking here about complete solutions provided by the PR, since in
case of partial solutions, the committer can assign himself on the issue
(depends on the quantity of modification he does).
Let me know what you think,
It’s not easy to decide. Naturally I’m more tempted by solution 2
(committer) because it’s usually overall more work from the committer part
(review, fix problems and maintain over the long run) and he’s taking the
responsibility for it (in case it leads to problems he’s one who’s going to
have to fix it and take the heat - he can try pushing it back to the
contributor but it may or may not work ;)). Also handling a PR is some work
for committers (we have a lot of open issues with PRs that prove this!) and
it’s good that the committer is “rewarded" by being the assignee in jira
too.
Note that the contributor is also already rewarded in the commit history
on github and on our Hall of Fame on
xwiki.org.
Now I’m not going to oppose 1 if everyone believes it’s better. If we do 1
we’ll just need to put clearly in the Committership page on
xwiki.org the
part about the responsibility when applying PRs.
Thanks
-Vincent
Caty
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs