Open Stack

Heh. Like I mentioned at the top of the thread, it's just a hack. We're currently merging with Roundabout to handle the Jenkins integration and make roundabout's workflow strategies pluggable.

So, right now only the pull request and core members are real, the votes are faked out.

The output from jenkins would be exactly the same as what we get from Gerrit (a new comment added to the pull request with the test results) ... only easier to find ;)

But yes, there is a risk that a core member could just hit "merge and close" and break trunk. That's perhaps the only real "con" I can think of.

-S

________________________________________
From: Jay Pipes [jaypipes at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:24 PM
To: Sandy Walsh
Cc: Josh Kearney; Soren Hansen; openstack at lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] A possible alternative to Gerrit ...

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh at rackspace.com> wrote:
> Yup, if you look at
> http://www.darksecretsoftware.com/static/hubcap.html
> you'll see there's a slot there for core & non-core approvals. We get the
> core approvers from the repos teams.

And where are the comments in
https://github.com/rackspace/python-novaclient/pull/108?

Where are the reviews?

In addition, this doesn't prevent anyone on the core team from doing a
straight close and merge of the pull request into trunk, potentially
breaking trunk.

Where are the hooks into Jenkins? Where can I see the output of the
Jenkins test jobs that executed against a proposed branch?

-jay

> I like the idea of another keyword than !lgtm for cores to say "I approve,
> but don't consider this the +2" ... perhaps just "lgtm" (no !) heh
> -S
> PS> Notice the funky new stylings thanks to Jake Dahn!
> ________________________________
> From: Josh Kearney [josh at jk0.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:05 PM
> To: Soren Hansen
> Cc: Sandy Walsh; openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] A possible alternative to Gerrit ...
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 6:54 AM, Soren Hansen <soren at linux2go.dk> wrote:
>
>> The critical point has never been whether we could reliably detect
>> people's votes (even though I really dislike parsing free-form text to
>> extract critical information like this). Even though Launchpad offers
>> voting information in a structured manner, we *intentionally* don't
>> auto-approve things there as soon as they have +2.
>>
>> Sometimes there are simply reasons why things shouldn't get merged
>> even though they have two approves. If there's already one +1, but
>> someone specific (someone with domain specific knowledge, a release
>> team member, etc) needs to sign off on it as well,  I still want to be
>> able to say that I've reviewed it and approve of it, without causing
>> it to get merged. We also want to be able to review features and vote
>> on them even during freeze times without causing them to get merged.
>
> Couldn't we just add an extra keyword like '!approved' that Hubcap would
> only acknowledge from Core members? Unless that keyword is present, no
> matter how many '!lgtm's are there, Hubcap will not attempt a merge.
>
> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in
> error, please delete it.
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.