[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Proposal to make Design Spec and Document for a feature mandatory.

[Niels de Vos]

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 11:34:12AM +0530, Amar Tumballi wrote:
> All,
> 
> Thanks to Nigel, this is now deployed, and any new patches referencing
> github (ie, new features) need the 'DocApproved' and 'SpecApproved' label.

Great! I hope we'll get more written down how new features are expected
to work and how users can benefit from them.

I thought we had a document that explained the different GitHub Issue
tags somewhere? Unfortunately I cant find it... Maybe someone can add it
in the Contrubtors Guide?
  https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/Contributors-Guide/Index/

Thanks,
Niels


> 
> Regards,
> Amar
> 
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:40 AM, Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > A better documentation about the feature, and also information about how
> > to use the features are one of the major ask of the community when they
> > want to use glusterfs, or want to contribute by helping get the features,
> > bug fixes for features, etc.
> >
> > Finally, we have taken some baby steps to get that ask of having better
> > design and documentation resolved. We had discussed this in our automation
> > goals [1], to make having design spec, and documentation mandatory for a
> > feature patch. Now, thanks to Shyam and Nigel, we have the patch ready to
> > automate this process [2].
> >
> > Feel free to review the patch, and comment on this.
> >
> > A heads up on how it looks like after this patch gets in.
> >
> > * A patch for a github reference won't pass smoke unless these labels are
> > present on github issue.
> > * Everyone, feel free to review and comment on the issue / patch
> > regarding the document. But, the label is expected to be provided only by
> > Project's general architects, and any industry experts we as community
> > nominate for validating feature. Initially for making sure we have a valid
> > process, where I don't provides flags quickly, expectation is to have two
> > people comment about approving the flags, and then the label can be
> > provided.
> > * Some may argue, the rate of development can reduce if we make this flag
> > mandatory, but what is the use of having a feature without design and
> > documentation on how to use it?
> >
> > For those who want to provide Spec and Doc approved flags, you can have a
> > quick link [3], to see all the tests which fail smoke. Not all smoke
> > failures would be for missing Spec and Doc flag, but this is just a quick
> > start.
> >
> > [1] - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AFkZmRRDXRxs21GnGauieI
> > yiIiRZ-nTEW8CPi7Gbp3g/edit
> > [2] - https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs-patch-acceptance-tests/pull/126
> > [3] - https://review.gluster.org/#/dashboard/?foreach=status:
> > open%20project:glusterfs%20branch:master%20&title=Github%2520Validation&&
> > Awaiting%2520Reviews=(label:Smoke=-1)
> >
> > We would like to implement this check soon, and happy to accommodate the
> > feedback and suggestions along the way.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Amar
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Amar Tumballi (amarts)

> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers