[Freeipa-devel] Linking tickets in the commit messages

[Milan Kubík]

On 09/17/2015 02:51 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 17.9.2015 14:08, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> On 09/17/2015 02:00 PM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>>>> On 09/17/2015 01:47 PM, Tomas Babej wrote:
>>>>>> Hi fellow developers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> more or less we tend to stick to the tradition of linking Trac 
>>>>>> tickets
>>>>>> to the commit messages of the patches we send to the list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, every now and then, a patch lands on the list, which is
>>>>>> either
>>>>>> linked to a BZ or does not contain any link at all. Admittedly, I am
>>>>>> also guilty of this mishap. This poses certain problems, as we're
>>>>>> trying
>>>>>> to automate the bookkeeping and pushing-related processes with
>>>>>> ipatool [1].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nevertheless, this useful habit is not formally agreed upon by
>>>>>> developers nor documented in our wiki [2]. I'd suggest we add it
>>>>>> there,
>>>>>> if we come to such consensus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This would mean:
>>>>>> * Patches fixing an issue described only in BZ (rare issue) would 
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> to create a Trac ticket referencing the BZ
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>>> * Patches fixing an issue not tracked in Trac nor BZ would need to
>>>>>> file
>>>>>> a ticket in Trac and reference it
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure we are there yet. For typos and small fixes, I do not
>>>>> think we
>>>>> need to create a hard requirement for a Trac ticket. But for patches
>>>>> that you
>>>>> want to be considered for say backports to downstream releases, it
>>>>> is better to
>>>>> have the ticket with the right metadata and collection of the right
>>>>> hashes that
>>>>> the downstream release can digest.
>>>> Yes, please do a ticket per a changeset.
>>>
>>> Are you agreeing now to me, i.e. do not require tickets for trivial
>>> fixes or to
>>> Tomas' proposal - require ticket for *all* patches?
>> I think we should have tickets for reasonable pieces of work. The
>> problem is always in identifying what does 'reasonable' mean. A
>> single-line fix may be an important CVE fix or a key to an important
>> bugfix. Still, there should be a context to fit, thus a ticket.
>
> Speaking as IPA package maitainer in RHEL, I would like to have ticket 
> link in every commit in maintenance branches. If a commit goes to the 
> master branch only, I'm OK with it not having a ticket link. So that's 
> where I would draw the line - if a commit goes into a maintenance 
> branch, it is a reasonable piece of work.
>
Hi,

in general, which ticket should be referenced from a commit that 
implements tests? It can happen that the tests cover a set of tickets. 
What should we do then?

Cheers,
Milan