[Cluster-devel] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Cluster-devel] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

Hello everybody,

It's time to figure out how to maintain the new Resource Agents
repository. Fabio and I already discussed this a bit in IRC.
There are two options:

a) everybody gets an account at github.com and commit rights,
   where everybody is all people who had commit rights to
   linux-ha.org and rgmanager agents repositories.

b) several maintainers have commit rights and everybody else
   sends patches to a ML; then one of the maintainers does a
   review and commits the patch (or pulls it from the author's
   repository).

Option a) incurs a bit less overhead and that's how our old
repositories worked. Option b) gives, at least nominally, more
control to the select group of maintainers, but also places even
more burden on them.

We are open for either of these.

Cheers,

Fabio and Dejan

[Cluster-devel] [Linux-ha-dev] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Andrew Beekhof]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan@suse.de> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> It's time to figure out how to maintain the new Resource Agents
> repository. Fabio and I already discussed this a bit in IRC.
> There are two options:
>
> a) everybody gets an account at github.com and commit rights,
> ? where everybody is all people who had commit rights to
> ? linux-ha.org and rgmanager agents repositories.
>
> b) several maintainers have commit rights and everybody else
> ? sends patches to a ML; then one of the maintainers does a
> ? review and commits the patch (or pulls it from the author's
> ? repository).

I suspect you want b) with maybe 6 people for redundancy.
The pull request workflow should be well suited to a project like this
and impose minimal overhead.

The ability to comment on patches in-line before merging them should
be pretty handy.


You're also welcome to put a copy at http://www.clusterlabs.org/git/
Its pretty easy to keep the two repos in sync, for example I have this
in .git/config for matahari:

[remote "origin"]
	fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
	url = git at github.com:matahari/matahari.git
	pushurl = git at github.com:matahari/matahari.git
	pushurl = ssh://beekhof at git.fedorahosted.org/git/matahari.git

"git push" then sends to both locations

>
> Option a) incurs a bit less overhead and that's how our old
> repositories worked. Option b) gives, at least nominally, more
> control to the select group of maintainers, but also places even
> more burden on them.
>
> We are open for either of these.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Fabio and Dejan
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev at lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
>

[Cluster-devel] [Linux-ha-dev] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:20:48AM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2011-03-14T19:49:29, Andrew Beekhof <andrew@beekhof.net> wrote:
> 
> > I suspect you want b) with maybe 6 people for redundancy.
> > The pull request workflow should be well suited to a project like this
> > and impose minimal overhead.
> 
> I prefer b as well, since it adds another review step. (Should we use
> the github.com code review tools?)

OK. It seems like nobody's that much interesting in this, so we
can just as well go with option b).

Fabio, I'd like to get the commit access rights. Florian Haas and
Lars Ellenberg have also been frequently reviewing user
contributions, so they should get commit rights too. I understand
that Florian already has that. Lars is about to create a
github.com account and he'll send you later his account name.

> Oh, and we can use the ha-wg-technical mailing list for cross-project
> coordination ;-)

Yes, but the list is very new and some people who may be affected
are perhaps not all subscribed.

Cheers,

Dejan

> Regards,
>     Lars
> 
> -- 
> Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg)
> "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
> 
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev at lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

[Cluster-devel] [Linux-ha-dev] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Fabio M. Di Nitto]

On 3/28/2011 5:28 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:20:48AM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>> On 2011-03-14T19:49:29, Andrew Beekhof <andrew@beekhof.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I suspect you want b) with maybe 6 people for redundancy.
>>> The pull request workflow should be well suited to a project like this
>>> and impose minimal overhead.
>>
>> I prefer b as well, since it adds another review step. (Should we use
>> the github.com code review tools?)
> 
> OK. It seems like nobody's that much interesting in this, so we
> can just as well go with option b).

WFM of course.

> 
> Fabio, I'd like to get the commit access rights. Florian Haas and
> Lars Ellenberg have also been frequently reviewing user
> contributions, so they should get commit rights too. I understand
> that Florian already has that. Lars is about to create a
> github.com account and he'll send you later his account name.

You will need to talk to Andrew for this. I am not the owner of the repo.

For now I did merge bits from Florian and I can do it while Andrew will
allow accounts to commit.

> 
>> Oh, and we can use the ha-wg-technical mailing list for cross-project
>> coordination ;-)
> 
> Yes, but the list is very new and some people who may be affected
> are perhaps not all subscribed.

Let?s make sure that the message is sent again to the mailing lists, we
can clearly still collect patches on the old lists for two/three months
while we transition.

Fabio

[Cluster-devel] [Linux-ha-dev] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 05:41:48PM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> On 3/28/2011 5:28 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:20:48AM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> >> On 2011-03-14T19:49:29, Andrew Beekhof <andrew@beekhof.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I suspect you want b) with maybe 6 people for redundancy.
> >>> The pull request workflow should be well suited to a project like this
> >>> and impose minimal overhead.
> >>
> >> I prefer b as well, since it adds another review step. (Should we use
> >> the github.com code review tools?)
> > 
> > OK. It seems like nobody's that much interesting in this, so we
> > can just as well go with option b).
> 
> WFM of course.

Woman FIDE Master? :)

> > Fabio, I'd like to get the commit access rights. Florian Haas and
> > Lars Ellenberg have also been frequently reviewing user
> > contributions, so they should get commit rights too. I understand
> > that Florian already has that. Lars is about to create a
> > github.com account and he'll send you later his account name.
> 
> You will need to talk to Andrew for this. I am not the owner of the repo.

I guess that Andrew's listening.

> For now I did merge bits from Florian and I can do it while Andrew will
> allow accounts to commit.
> 
> > 
> >> Oh, and we can use the ha-wg-technical mailing list for cross-project
> >> coordination ;-)
> > 
> > Yes, but the list is very new and some people who may be affected
> > are perhaps not all subscribed.
> 
> Let?s make sure that the message is sent again to the mailing lists, we
> can clearly still collect patches on the old lists for two/three months
> while we transition.

I actually expected the ha-wg-technical list to be low volume
and for "project coordination" and similar, not for daily
business.

Cheers,

Dejan

> Fabio
> 

[Cluster-devel] [Linux-ha-dev] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Fabio M. Di Nitto]

On 03/29/2011 03:15 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 05:41:48PM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
>> On 3/28/2011 5:28 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:20:48AM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>>>> On 2011-03-14T19:49:29, Andrew Beekhof <andrew@beekhof.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I suspect you want b) with maybe 6 people for redundancy.
>>>>> The pull request workflow should be well suited to a project like this
>>>>> and impose minimal overhead.
>>>>
>>>> I prefer b as well, since it adds another review step. (Should we use
>>>> the github.com code review tools?)
>>>
>>> OK. It seems like nobody's that much interesting in this, so we
>>> can just as well go with option b).
>>
>> WFM of course.
> 
> Woman FIDE Master? :)
> 
>>> Fabio, I'd like to get the commit access rights. Florian Haas and
>>> Lars Ellenberg have also been frequently reviewing user
>>> contributions, so they should get commit rights too. I understand
>>> that Florian already has that. Lars is about to create a
>>> github.com account and he'll send you later his account name.
>>
>> You will need to talk to Andrew for this. I am not the owner of the repo.
> 
> I guess that Andrew's listening.

Yes it appears that I have admin rights on the repo, so just fire up the
requests with your github account and i'll try to add people.

> 
>> For now I did merge bits from Florian and I can do it while Andrew will
>> allow accounts to commit.
>>
>>>
>>>> Oh, and we can use the ha-wg-technical mailing list for cross-project
>>>> coordination ;-)
>>>
>>> Yes, but the list is very new and some people who may be affected
>>> are perhaps not all subscribed.
>>
>> Let?s make sure that the message is sent again to the mailing lists, we
>> can clearly still collect patches on the old lists for two/three months
>> while we transition.
> 
> I actually expected the ha-wg-technical list to be low volume
> and for "project coordination" and similar, not for daily
> business.

As long as we don't start merging the agents into clusterlabs/, I would
assume that patches we get on each mailing lists are targeted to the
specific set.

In the long run, we will have time to decide for a patch-list or
something. I don't think we need to be super strict from day 0 and let's
thing settle down on their own during a transition phase.

fabio

[Cluster-devel] [Linux-ha-dev] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Fabio M. Di Nitto]

On 3/29/2011 3:15 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:

>>> Fabio, I'd like to get the commit access rights. Florian Haas and
>>> Lars Ellenberg have also been frequently reviewing user
>>> contributions, so they should get commit rights too. I understand
>>> that Florian already has that. Lars is about to create a
>>> github.com account and he'll send you later his account name.
>>
>> You will need to talk to Andrew for this. I am not the owner of the repo.
> 
> I guess that Andrew's listening.
> 
>> For now I did merge bits from Florian and I can do it while Andrew will
>> allow accounts to commit.

I got the admin rights now, I just need the list of github accounts.

Cheers
Fabio

[Cluster-devel] [Linux-ha-dev] new resource agents repository commit policy

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

Hi Fabio,

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:48:46AM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> On 3/29/2011 3:15 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> 
> >>> Fabio, I'd like to get the commit access rights. Florian Haas and
> >>> Lars Ellenberg have also been frequently reviewing user
> >>> contributions, so they should get commit rights too. I understand
> >>> that Florian already has that. Lars is about to create a
> >>> github.com account and he'll send you later his account name.
> >>
> >> You will need to talk to Andrew for this. I am not the owner of the repo.
> > 
> > I guess that Andrew's listening.
> > 
> >> For now I did merge bits from Florian and I can do it while Andrew will
> >> allow accounts to commit.
> 
> I got the admin rights now, I just need the list of github accounts.

My account is dmuhamedagic.

Lars will send you his when he creates one.

BTW, I just made my first pull request, a set of two patches from
one of our regular contributors imported with git-am, hope it
looks OK.

Cheers,

Dejan

> Cheers
> Fabio
>