[xwiki-devs] [Vote] Assignee for PR: Contributor or Committer?
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, Caty
+1 for Contributor On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> 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, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On 26 Nov 2014 at 14:21:48, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) 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
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:44 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
On 26 Nov 2014 at 14:21:48, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) 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.
This is also true if the committer is no longer available or if he is busy with some other module/task. And anyway, if the time passed since the issue was closed is long enough to make the Contributor unavailable then that issue is probably closed and released so we need to open another issue which will have a different assignee.
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 [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
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, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
On 26 Nov 2014 at 14:21:48, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) ([email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) 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 [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+0 On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 03:21:06PM +0200, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 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, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Jean Simard [email protected] Research engineer at XWiki SAS http://www.xwiki.com Committer on the XWiki.org project http://www.xwiki.org
I'm +1 for Contributor (if the PR is complete). Is kind of the committer's job to do the PR review and although this is hard work :) encouraging the contributor in making more PRs and maybe then voting him as committer is a nice strategy. We can always see in the Commits tab who did the merge. Thanks, Caty On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Jean SIMARD <[email protected]> wrote:
+0
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 03:21:06PM +0200, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 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, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Jean Simard [email protected] Research engineer at XWiki SAS http://www.xwiki.com Committer on the XWiki.org project http://www.xwiki.org _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 for contributor (If I'm allow to vote ;-) ) because identify/isolate issue + create/describe issue on jira + screenshot AND find patch + test (almost) all usercaset + PR taking time and effort too :-) Pascal B (a tiny contributor) :-) De : Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> À : XWiki Developers <[email protected]> Envoyé le : Mercredi 26 novembre 2014 14h57 Objet : Re: [xwiki-devs] [Vote] Assignee for PR: Contributor or Committer? I'm +1 for Contributor (if the PR is complete). Is kind of the committer's job to do the PR review and although this is hard work :) encouraging the contributor in making more PRs and maybe then voting him as committer is a nice strategy. We can always see in the Commits tab who did the merge. Thanks, Caty On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Jean SIMARD <[email protected]> wrote:
+0
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 03:21:06PM +0200, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 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, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Jean Simard [email protected] Research engineer at XWiki SAS http://www.xwiki.com Committer on the XWiki.org project http://www.xwiki.org
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
This is not the first time we discuss that I had the impression it was ok for everyone to put 1: contributor. It's very easy to know what committer applied the pull request and I feel that the issue should be assigned to who actually fixed/done what is described, there is never too much contribution rewards. On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> 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, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
+1 for 1. On 11/26/2014 08:21 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 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, Caty
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu
Hi, Vote 1: Contributor received 5 +1 binding, and 1 +1 non binding votes. Thanks for your votes. On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 for 1.
On 11/26/2014 08:21 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 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, Caty
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Hi, We forgot to document it so I’ve put it at http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HRule:Ass... Also note that several use cases were missing so I’ve added some too, please verify they’re ok for you: * no jira account * substantial rewrite of the PR Thanks -Vincent
On 2 Dec 2014, at 12:52, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
Vote 1: Contributor received 5 +1 binding, and 1 +1 non binding votes.
Thanks for your votes.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 for 1.
On 11/26/2014 08:21 AM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 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, Caty
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
participants (9)
-
Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) -
Eduard Moraru -
Jean SIMARD -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Pascal BASTIEN -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol -
vincent＠massol.net