[Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Proposal: move glusterfs development to github workflow, completely

[Niels de Vos]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 03:52:30PM +0530, Amar Tumballi wrote:
> Any thoughts on this?
> 
> 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.

Is there a reason to move to Travis? GitHub does offer integration with
Jenkins, so we should be able to keep using our existing CI, I think?

Niels


> 
> -Amar
> 
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 5:13 PM Amar Tumballi <amarts at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Amar
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:38 PM Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 06:57:14AM +0530, Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:10 AM Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 08:36:30PM +0530, Aravinda Vishwanathapura
> >> Krishna
> >> > > Murthy wrote:
> >> > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 7:49 PM Joe Julian <joe at julianfamily.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > > Comparing the changes between revisions is something
> >> > > > > that GitHub does not support...
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > It does support that,
> >> > > > > actually._______________________________________________
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yes, it does support. We need to use Squash merge after all review
> >> is
> >> > > done.
> >> > >
> >> > > Squash merge would also combine multiple commits that are intended to
> >> > > stay separate. This is really bad :-(
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > We should treat 1 patch in gerrit as 1 PR in github, then squash merge
> >> > works same as how reviews in gerrit are done.  Or we can come up with
> >> > label, upon which we can actually do 'rebase and merge' option, which
> >> can
> >> > preserve the commits as is.
> >>
> >> Something like that would be good. For many things, including commit
> >> message update squashing patches is just loosing details. We dont do
> >> that with Gerrit now, and we should not do that when using GitHub PRs.
> >> Proper documenting changes is still very important to me, the details of
> >> patches should be explained in commit messages. This only works well
> >> when developers 'force push' to the branch holding the PR.
> >>
> >> Niels
> >> _______________________________________________
> >>
> >> Community Meeting Calendar:
> >>
> >> APAC Schedule -
> >> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
> >> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/836554017
> >>
> >> NA/EMEA Schedule -
> >> Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
> >> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/486278655
> >>
> >> Gluster-devel mailing list
> >> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> >> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> >>
> >>

> _______________________________________________
> 
> Community Meeting Calendar:
> 
> APAC Schedule -
> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/118564314
> 
> NA/EMEA Schedule -
> Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/118564314
> 
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>