<div dir="ltr">Any thoughts on this?<div><br></div><div>I tried a basic .travis.yml for the unified glusterfs repo I am maintaining, and it is good enough for getting most of the tests. Considering we are very close to glusterfs-7.0 release, it is good to time this after 7.0 release.</div><div><br></div><div>-Amar</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 5:13 PM Amar Tumballi <<a href="mailto:amarts@gmail.com">amarts@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Going through the thread, I see in general positive responses for the same, with few points on review system, and not loosing information when merging the patches.<div><br></div><div>While we are working on that, we need to see and understand how our CI/CD looks like with github migration. We surely need suggestion and volunteers here to get this going.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Amar</div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:38 PM Niels de Vos <<a href="mailto:ndevos@redhat.com" target="_blank">ndevos@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 06:57:14AM +0530, Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan wrote:<br>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:10 AM Niels de Vos <<a href="mailto:ndevos@redhat.com" target="_blank">ndevos@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 08:36:30PM +0530, Aravinda Vishwanathapura Krishna<br>
> > Murthy wrote:<br>
> > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 7:49 PM Joe Julian <<a href="mailto:joe@julianfamily.org" target="_blank">joe@julianfamily.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > > Comparing the changes between revisions is something<br>
> > > > that GitHub does not support...<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > It does support that,<br>
> > > > actually._______________________________________________<br>
> > > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > Yes, it does support. We need to use Squash merge after all review is<br>
> > done.<br>
> ><br>
> > Squash merge would also combine multiple commits that are intended to<br>
> > stay separate. This is really bad :-(<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> We should treat 1 patch in gerrit as 1 PR in github, then squash merge<br>
> works same as how reviews in gerrit are done. Or we can come up with<br>
> label, upon which we can actually do 'rebase and merge' option, which can<br>
> preserve the commits as is.<br>
<br>
Something like that would be good. For many things, including commit<br>
message update squashing patches is just loosing details. We dont do<br>
that with Gerrit now, and we should not do that when using GitHub PRs.<br>
Proper documenting changes is still very important to me, the details of<br>
patches should be explained in commit messages. This only works well<br>
when developers 'force push' to the branch holding the PR.<br>
<br>
Niels<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
<br>
Community Meeting Calendar:<br>
<br>
APAC Schedule -<br>
Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST<br>
Bridge: <a href="https://bluejeans.com/836554017" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bluejeans.com/836554017</a><br>
<br>
NA/EMEA Schedule -<br>
Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT<br>
Bridge: <a href="https://bluejeans.com/486278655" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bluejeans.com/486278655</a><br>
<br>
Gluster-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gluster-devel@gluster.org" target="_blank">Gluster-devel@gluster.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>