submission procedures and status update

submission procedures and status update

[Damian, Alexandru]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 806 bytes --]

Hello,

The toaster patch-set submitted on 1st May was not merged yet, so I will
not be submitting again until that submission is merged, to avoid
confusions.

​The currently re-based ​submission queue is here

adamian/20150507_submission


​I kindly request that all submissions be made by sending a poky-contrib
branch to review, instead of ​mailing the patch directly. This will
decrease my work load, and it is easier to automate.



Sasha suggested that we move the model to using a github or similar
infrastructure, so that the submission tracking be more automatic.

I would like to hear community's opinion on this - please comment in this
thread on whenever this would be suitable or not for you.


Thank you,
Alex


-- 
Alex Damian
Yocto Project
SSG / OTC

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2185 bytes --]

Re: submission procedures and status update

[Barros Pena, Belen]

On 07/05/2015 11:47, "Damian, Alexandru" <alexandru.damian@intel.com>
wrote:

>Sasha suggested that we move the model to using a github or similar
>infrastructure, so that the submission tracking be more automatic.

This is probably a dumb question, but hey, it's coming from the designer,
so what did you expect? ;) What will moving to github or similar give us
that we don't have now? Issues? Pull requests? How will the submission
tracking be 'more automatic'?

Thanks!

Belén

Re: submission procedures and status update

[Alexander Kanevskiy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2577 bytes --]

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Barros Pena, Belen <
belen.barros.pena@intel.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 07/05/2015 11:47, "Damian, Alexandru" <alexandru.damian@intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Sasha suggested that we move the model to using a github or similar
> >infrastructure, so that the submission tracking be more automatic.
>
> This is probably a dumb question, but hey, it's coming from the designer,
> so what did you expect? ;) What will moving to github or similar give us
> that we don't have now? Issues? Pull requests? How will the submission
> tracking be 'more automatic'?
>

those are good questions and definitely to be answered.  So, as originator
of the idea, let me elaborate a bit :)


Using GitHub as a service would provide you few things for free, and you're
free to use all of them or only some of them.
- Git hosting with very good bandwidth, geographically distributed delivery
network, etc.
- Way to collaborate (pull requests between branches within one repository
or between forked repositories, as anyone is free to fork).
- Issue tracking (probably Toaster don't need it, as it's covered by
bugzilla).
- Wiki pages (also probably not needed).
- freely available connected applications. good example could be Travis CI
( https://travis-ci.org/ ). You can easily utilise  their great service to
run unit tests for every pull request.

Now, about how submission tracking can be more automatic:

- every one has ability to fork your project easily (1 click). This
simplifies life of developers how to prepare set of patches to be sent.
- each series of patches can be organised as pull request to main
repository.
- each pull request has status (open/closed). so, it's easy to get (even
programmatically) how many pull requests are in open state for a project.
- for every pull request you have "discussion area". so, you don't need to
dig out via mailing lists archives if you need to look for some comment of
patch that was discussed 5 months ago.
- using attached CI system, it's possible to provide status of build/test
runs for every commit or pull request.
- GitHub has good set of APIs and hooks that can trigger CI systems
(Jenkins/buildbot/etc) on events like new pull requests or comments or
merges. freedom for automation compared to monitoring mailing lists :)






> Thanks!
>
> Belén
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> toaster mailing list
> toaster@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/toaster
>



-- 
br, Alexander Kanevskiy

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3826 bytes --]

Re: submission procedures and status update

[Barros Pena, Belen]

GitHub sure is a nice tool :)

I have two more questions (inline)

Thanks!

Belén

On 07/05/2015 12:28, "Alexander Kanevskiy" <kad@kad.name> wrote:

>
>
>On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Barros Pena, Belen
><belen.barros.pena@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>On 07/05/2015 11:47, "Damian, Alexandru" <alexandru.damian@intel.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Sasha suggested that we move the model to using a github or similar
>>infrastructure, so that the submission tracking be more automatic.
>
>This is probably a dumb question, but hey, it's coming from the designer,
>so what did you expect? ;) What will moving to github or similar give us
>that we don't have now? Issues? Pull requests? How will the submission
>tracking be 'more automatic'?
>
>
>
>
>those are good questions and definitely to be answered.  So, as
>originator of the idea, let me elaborate a bit :)
>
>
>
>
>Using GitHub as a service would provide you few things for free, and
>you're free to use all of them or only some of them.
>- Git hosting with very good bandwidth, geographically distributed
>delivery network, etc.
>- Way to collaborate (pull requests between branches within one
>repository or between forked repositories, as anyone is free to fork).
>- Issue tracking (probably Toaster don't need it, as it's covered by
>bugzilla).
>- Wiki pages (also probably not needed).
>- freely available connected applications. good example could be Travis
>CI ( https://travis-ci.org/ ). You can easily utilise  their great
>service to run unit tests for every pull request.
>
>
>Now, about how submission tracking can be more automatic:
>
>
>- every one has ability to fork your project easily (1 click). This
>simplifies life of developers how to prepare set of patches to be sent.

What would be the "project"? Toaster is part of the poky repo, and
contributors normally develop on top of the poky master branch (Alex,
please correct me if I am wrong). We don't really keep a toaster/master
branch. 
 

>- each series of patches can be organised as pull request to main
>repository. 

How would this impact our current development workflow? Right now we have
a 2-step submission process where Alex is the upstream submission
gatekeeper (he collects contributors' patches from the Toaster mailing
list twice a week, makes sure nothing breaks and then sends them as a
patch series to the bitbake mailing list).

>- each pull request has status (open/closed). so, it's easy to get (even
>programmatically) how many pull requests are in open state for a project.
>- for every pull request you have "discussion area". so, you don't need
>to dig out via mailing lists archives if you need to look for some
>comment of patch that was discussed 5 months ago.
>- using attached CI system, it's possible to provide status of build/test
>runs for every commit or pull request.
>- GitHub has good set of APIs and hooks that can trigger CI systems
>(Jenkins/buildbot/etc) on events like new pull requests or comments or
>merges. freedom for automation compared to monitoring mailing lists :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Thanks!
>
>Belén
>
>--
>_______________________________________________
>toaster mailing list
>toaster@yoctoproject.org
>https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/toaster
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>br, Alexander Kanevskiy
>
>

Re: submission procedures and status update

[Alexander Kanevskiy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2180 bytes --]

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Barros Pena, Belen <
belen.barros.pena@intel.com> wrote:


> >Now, about how submission tracking can be more automatic:
> >
> >
> >- every one has ability to fork your project easily (1 click). This
> >simplifies life of developers how to prepare set of patches to be sent.
>
> What would be the "project"? Toaster is part of the poky repo, and
> contributors normally develop on top of the poky master branch (Alex,
> please correct me if I am wrong). We don't really keep a toaster/master
> branch.
>
>
well, here there are couple of scenarios that I can think of:
1. start mirroring poky to github similarly like
https://github.com/openembedded/ mirrored.
 That way everyone can have their own "contrib" area where they can develop
set of patches before submitted to poky ML or upload to yp.org git as
currently.
2. separate toaster development into separate git tree, like bitbake is
separated from poky. And thus have it merged into poky via combo-layer
tool, as other pieces are merged.

maybe community might come up with some other scenarios :)




> >- each series of patches can be organised as pull request to main
> >repository.
>
> How would this impact our current development workflow? Right now we have
> a 2-step submission process where Alex is the upstream submission
> gatekeeper (he collects contributors' patches from the Toaster mailing
> list twice a week, makes sure nothing breaks and then sends them as a
> patch series to the bitbake mailing list).
>
>
 As noted above, for me having toaster on par with bitbake (separate repo,
merged to poky via combo-layer) sounds like the best approach.

However, first variant above, where toaster developed in copy of poky on
github+pull requests also might be a solution.
It would still require manual step of extracting set of patches from github
repo and sending it to bitbake or yocto mailing list and then tracking
status of them in mail client.

Of course it might be also option to open pull requests towards
https://github.com/openembedded/bitbake and ask folks to merge from where :)



-- 
br, Alexander Kanevskiy

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3316 bytes --]

Re: submission procedures and status update

[Michael Wood]

On 07/05/15 11:47, Damian, Alexandru wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The toaster patch-set submitted on 1st May was not merged yet, so I 
> will not be submitting again until that submission is merged, to avoid 
> confusions.
>
> ​The currently re-based ​submission queue is here
>
> adamian/20150507_submission
>
>
> ​I kindly request that all submissions be made by sending a 
> poky-contrib branch to review, instead of ​mailing the patch directly. 
> This will decrease my work load, and it is easier to automate.
>
>

Shall we remove the Sending_patches_to_Toaster_Project section on the wiki?

( 
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Contribute_to_Toaster#Sending_patches_to_Toaster_Project 
)

Re: submission procedures and status update

[Damian, Alexandru]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1090 bytes --]

I think the section is up to date....

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Michael Wood <michael.g.wood@intel.com>
wrote:

> On 07/05/15 11:47, Damian, Alexandru wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> The toaster patch-set submitted on 1st May was not merged yet, so I will
>> not be submitting again until that submission is merged, to avoid
>> confusions.
>>
>> ​The currently re-based ​submission queue is here
>>
>> adamian/20150507_submission
>>
>>
>> ​I kindly request that all submissions be made by sending a poky-contrib
>> branch to review, instead of ​mailing the patch directly. This will
>> decrease my work load, and it is easier to automate.
>>
>>
>>
> Shall we remove the Sending_patches_to_Toaster_Project section on the wiki?
>
> (
> https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Contribute_to_Toaster#Sending_patches_to_Toaster_Project
> )
>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> toaster mailing list
> toaster@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/toaster
>



-- 
Alex Damian
Yocto Project
SSG / OTC

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2031 bytes --]