<div dir="ltr">One of the things I noticed is, if we make <a href="https://scan.coverity.com/projects/gluster-glusterfs">https://scan.coverity.com/projects/gluster-glusterfs</a> as the source of truth for coverity issues, then the issue IDs will be constant. We can reference them.<div><br></div><div>Also note that we should most probably focusing on 'High Impact' issues first for sure, than the medium/low impact issues.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,<br>Amar</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Vijay Bellur <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vbellur@redhat.com" target="_blank">vbellur@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="">On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Atin Mukherjee <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:amukherj@redhat.com" target="_blank">amukherj@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><span><div dir="auto">On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 at 18:31, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY <<a href="mailto:kkeithle@redhat.com" target="_blank">kkeithle@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:<br>
> While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over<br>
> last few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the<br>
> coverity issue id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a<br>
> difficult situation to understand the exact complaint coming out of the<br>
> coverity. From my past experience in fixing coverity defects, sometimes<br>
> the fixes might look simple but they are not.<br>
><br>
> May I request all the developers to include the defect id in the commit<br>
> message for all the coverity fixes?<br>
><br>
<br>
How does that work? AFAIK the defect IDs are constantly changing as some<br>
get fixed and new ones get added.</blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div></span><div dir="auto">We’d need atleast (a) the defect id with pointer to the coverity link which most of the devs are now following I guess but with a caveat that link goes stale in 7 days and the review needs to be done by that time or (b) the commit message should exactly have the coverity description which is more neat.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">( I was not knowing the fact the defect id are not constant and later on got to know this from Nigel today)</div><span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br></blockquote></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div></span><div>+1 to providing a clean description of the issue rather than using a temporary defect ID. </div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>-Vijay</div></font></span></div></div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Gluster-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gluster-devel@gluster.org">Gluster-devel@gluster.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.gluster.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Amar Tumballi (amarts)<br></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>