Open Stack

If we are using Co-Authored-By tags why not add something to automatically
look for them in the git logs, I have a hunch other projects will have
similar cases?

git log --grep=Co-Authored-By --since=6.months | grep "Co-Authored-By" |
sort | uniq

Gives a quick and dirty list that can be compared to the regular author
list.


On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:

> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119666/ is the first pass, I'll do a
> catch up closer to the election if its required.
>
> Michael
>
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Anita Kuno <anteaya at anteaya.info> wrote:
> > On 09/05/2014 11:38 PM, Michael Still wrote:
> >> If I knew when you were going to generate the list of voting ATCs, I
> >> would be happy to propose a review against extra-atcs which lists all
> >> the co-authored-bys for nova before then. It would require a TC
> >> review, but we're actually pretty fast at those for mechanical things.
> >>
> >> Michael
> > This seems to be the easiest/fastest way to accomplish your goal.
> >
> > The electoral rolls will be generated after September 26, 2014 05:59
> > UTC, so please have any and all changes merged to the extra-atcs file
> > prior to that date/time to ensure those names are included in the
> > intended projects for the ptl and tc electoral rolls. (The cut off date
> > for eligibility is the same for both elections.)
> >
> > Thanks, let me know if there are any other questions/details I can help
> > with,
> > Anita.
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Anita Kuno <anteaya at anteaya.info>
> wrote:
> >>> On 09/05/2014 07:44 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Sep 5, 2014, at 7:09 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I bring this up because Nova has a large example of this in Juno, and
> >>>>> I want to make sure we handle it nicely. If this is the wrong list,
> >>>>> feel free to cc others.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd like to see co-authored-by confer ATC status. Or, I'd like to at
> >>>>> least see a discussion on if it should.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is of interest for me because the ironic nova driver is in the
> >>>>> process of merging, and we've used co-authored-by to acknowledge the
> >>>>> contributions of the various authors when we lose the git history
> from
> >>>>> the remote repository. It think its a nice touch, but I'd also like
> to
> >>>>> see those authors get ATC.
> >>>>
> >>>> I thought this was already the case, actually. Absolutely +1 if not.
> >>>>
> >>> Jeremy can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe this is the script
> >>> that he uses to create the electoral roll:
> >>>
> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/config/tree/tools/atc/email_stats.py
> >>> This script generates the list of emails I need to use for the poll to
> >>> add the emails of the electorate.
> >>>
> >>> So one option is to offer a patch to extend that script to include
> >>> co-authored by if we can find a gerrit query that will give results for
> >>> Co-Authored. (I'm working on it and have come up empty thus far:
> >>> https://review.openstack.org/Documentation/user-search.html) If we did
> >>> this we should probably also ensure a governance resolution is merged
> >>> prior to September 26, 2014 05:59 UTC identifying that the definition
> of
> >>> "members who committed a change to a repository" as outlined in the
> >>> charter is expanded to include co-authored by, just to dot all the i's
> >>> and cross all the t's.
> >>>
> >>> Another option is to submit a list of names of contributors that have
> >>> status by way of co-authored-by but not by owner of a commit as
> >>> extra-atc contributors.
> >>>
> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/extra-atcs
> >>> There is already a mechanism to include names in this file, both by
> >>> governance decision and the above script. This would require the list
> of
> >>> names to be compiled by nova, submitted to the tc and merged to the
> >>> extra-atc file prior to September 26, 2014 05:59 UTC. There is time for
> >>> this to happen.
> >>>
> >>> My input is based on finding options to make the technical/governance
> >>> side of this work. I have no opinion on whether this should be
> >>> undertaken as that decision is up to the tc.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Anita.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rackspace Australia
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-TC mailing list
> OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/attachments/20140907/dbec822f/attachment.html>