Re: [jsp-dev] [External] : Re: Removing restrictions on direct commits

[Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmm. This is really strange. I'm seeing some odd UI behaviour around 
these settings.

With JSP the UI appears to allow PRs to be required without also 
requiring at least one reviewer. Some Googling suggests there is a UI 
bug here. I've tried to configure JSP to require PRs but not require 
reviews. I'll need to do some testing to see if it works. Fingers crossed...

Mark



On 05/11/2021 16:46, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 05/11/2021 16:26, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > I'm not convinced on the merits of always using PRs but several people 
> > have made this comment across several projects. Given the community 
> > desire to use PRs, I'm going to limit the changes for now to just 
> > removing the *technical* requirement for PRs to be reviewed. The 
> > social requirement that substantive changes must be via PR and must 
> > allow time for community review remains.
> >
> > The desire to always use PRs is something I'd like to explore but I'll 
> > do that in another thread.
>
> Ah.
>
> Now I have admin access it appears that if PRs are required then so are 
> reviews. We can't require PRs without the review. Therefore I am going 
> to remove the PR requirement.
>
> The social requirement that substantive changes must be via PR and must 
> allow time for community review remains.
>
> I'll try and make my changes via PR but a few trivial fixes may end up 
> going directly to master.
>
> Mark
>
>
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > On 04/11/2021 23:25, Ed Bratt wrote:
> > > Just repeating the statement I made on WebSocket -- I would prefer 
> > > whatever process is adopted strongly advocates for PRs, even if the 
> > > submitter immediately turns around and then merges (and strongly 
> > > discourages direct commits). From my vantage, this provides a more 
> > > visible record about how the repository evolved. I recognize the 
> > > commit log contains all of the information but I still prefer the PR 
> > > approach.
> > >
> > > Just my input.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > -- Ed
> > >
> > > On 11/4/2021 1:48 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > > > As a first step, I have opened an issue to make the project lead 
> > > > (me) an admin - as I should be according to the Eclipse Handbook. 
> > > > With admin karma, I should then be able to make changes to the 
> > > > review requirements.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > > On 03/11/2021 16:33, arjan tijms wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Especially for JSP I'm strongly in favour of having the 
> > > > > restrictions removed. We don't have an abundance of committers 
> > > > > including both very junior and very senior people, and there's 
> > > > > practically little to no in-depth reviews because of that.
> > > > >
> > > > > If there's anything to be corrected it can be done after a commit 
> > > > > I'm sure.
> > > > >
> > > > > So +1 for JSP.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > Arjan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 5:06 PM Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >     All,
> > > > >
> > > > >     In approx 24 hours time I intend to request that the branch
> > > > >     restrictions
> > > > >     that prevent committers committing directly to the master 
> > > > > branch and
> > > > >     those that require every PR to be reviewed before merge are 
> > > > > removed.
> > > > >
> > > > >     My reasoning is as follows:
> > > > >     - I have seen the benefits of these restrictions not being 
> > > > > present in EL
> > > > >     - I'm expecting a number of non-substantive changes will be 
> > > > > required to
> > > > >         successfully complete the release process and PR + review 
> > > > > for all of
> > > > >         them will significantly slow us down
> > > > >     - Committers are perfectly capable of determining which changes 
> > > > > need a
> > > > >         PR and review and which can be made directly - and if they 
> > > > > get it
> > > > >         wrong changes can easily be reverted
> > > > >
> > > > >     I was intending to propose this change after the Jakarta 10 
> > > > > release but
> > > > >     on reflection, I think the sooner, the better.
> > > > >
> > > > >     Thoughts? Comments? Objects?
> > > > >
> > > > >     Mark
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >     _______________________________________________
> > > > >     jsp-dev mailing list
> > > > >     jsp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jsp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >     To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsp-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YdIOBCbArHvdhYbJ7KjC5AQYftFpcg4d8iDYYNlZ2zVvm70C22nXMGVcpkzXVmg$ 
> > > > > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsp-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YdIOBCbArHvdhYbJ7KjC5AQYftFpcg4d8iDYYNlZ2zVvm70C22nXMGVcpkzXVmg$ 
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > jsp-dev mailing list
> > > > > jsp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
> > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsp-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YdIOBCbArHvdhYbJ7KjC5AQYftFpcg4d8iDYYNlZ2zVvm70C22nXMGVcpkzXVmg$ 
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > jsp-dev mailing list
> > > > jsp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
> > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsp-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!YdIOBCbArHvdhYbJ7KjC5AQYftFpcg4d8iDYYNlZ2zVvm70C22nXMGVcpkzXVmg$ 
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > jsp-dev mailing list
> > jsp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
> > https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsp-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> jsp-dev mailing list
> jsp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsp-dev