-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Discussion: Codify How Pull Requests are Landed #86
Comments
By this I mean to say that if there has been no activity on the PR, including approvals. If there is active discussion but no approval it shouldn't be landed. |
This sounds a little short to me, thinking about weekends for example. Perhaps 72 hours? |
Yeah probably 72 hours will fit better. |
@danbev that sounds reasonable to me. |
I'm not sure what the current issue is. I also think we could just use existing tooling instead of having a doc with rules in presumably markdown docs. Examples:
I don't want to have an SLO that can't be enforced or that isn't a problem currently. |
@grant I agree that the automated checks are good. That's why my first guideline is "No pull request may land without passing all automated checks". But I think some additional organizational structure is useful, particularly for people who live in different time zones. For example, I believe @danbev is 9 hours ahead of you. If we want to have solid engagement from contributors across the globe, it's important to give consideration to the fact that he might want to be included in the pull/review/land process. But if you submit a PR when you get up in the morning, on Friday and land it on Saturday morning, there's a good chance he will have completely missed all of that. I actually think that these guidelines are even looser than they should be. My original idea was.
(well tbh, I did not have 72 in my original draft, but taking @danbev's cue) In my view this isn't about SLO, it's about respecting the community and other maintainers, giving them an opportunity to weigh in on pull requests before they land. |
@lance I think we should not have a time minimum for PRs approved from at least one mantainer (other than the author). This slows down hotfixes, like it happened in past in sdk-go where i broke some stuff and we needed an urgent fix to release 😄 If a PR is approved, then it's fine. Of course, it's at discretion of the mantainer to avoid landing a big PR too soon, without proper review |
@slinkydeveloper good points. I was trying to think of situations where a maintainer might want to stop a pull request from landing but because of time zones may not see it immediately. Do you think it's overkill? There could be other ways to handle hot fixes - with labels for example. But maybe we don't need to bother with this unless it becomes an issue. So how's this?
|
I agree with that second version 😄 |
Fixes: cloudevents#86 Signed-off-by: Lance Ball <lball@redhat.com>
Fixes: #86 Signed-off-by: Lance Ball <lball@redhat.com>
Currently there are only a handful of folks in the @cloudevents/sdk-maintainers group who are actively participating in this repository. But as other contributors come on board, it might be good to codify how pull requests are landed.
For example, can a contributor with committer rights submit, approve and land their own PR all within a single day? A single hour? At the risk of overkill, here's a strawman proposal.
Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: