[katello-devel] Trello for fighting the pull-requests mess

[Eric D Helms]

Not opposed to this idea. Personally, email filters +
https://github.com/organizations/Katello/dashboard/pulls have kept me from
having any confusion.
I think this idea helps with lots of community PRs and when you have lots
of large pull requests, but my concern is over enforcing this workflow on
small, short focused PRs (that a lot of our work tends to be). Something to
consider, the workflow you describe also introduces some steps and elements
of the process that we didn't previously have or enforce:

- PR 'state'
- PRs being in a 'review' state
- defined PR reviewers

-Eric

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Ivan Necas <inecas at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I don't know how you feel about the pull-requests situation right now but
> I'm
> getting quite lost, especially after the split.
>
> The information I want to see is:
>
> * what are the PRs that are not being reviewed yet
> * is my PR being reviewed
> * is the PR waiting for review, rework or is it ready to merge
> * who is doing the review, who was asked to do the review
> * watch PRs progress (especially when it was merged) when interested
>
> … and all of this for all our repos on one place.
>
> I kind of like the approach the Foreman team has [1]. Therefore I've set up
> similar board for Katello [2]:
>
> https://trello.com/board/katello-pull-requests/519b4226fdc9a46b1c002dbb
>
> It works like this:
>
> 1) when a PR is opened in Github, new card is created in "New" list
> 2) someone triages the PR (maybe the author itself), sets flags or due to
> date if needed
> 3) the author can assign the people that he would like to get reviews from
> if any
> 4) the cards is moved to "Needs review"
> 5) when someone starts with the review, moves the card into "Active
> reviews" (the information about
>    who moved the cards is logged in the card, so no need for explicit
> assignment of the reviewer)
> 6) depending on how the review ends up, the reviewer(s) move the card into
> "Waiting on team advice"
>    (if someone else is needed for advice), "Waiting on contributor" if
> issues found with the PR,
>    or "Pending merge" if everything is fine.
> 7) in case the PR needed rework, after doing so, goto 3)
>
> When the PR is closed, the corresponding card in Trello is automatically
> archived.
>
> As the integration piece, I've used the dcleal's fork of puppet-webhooks
> [3],
> I'm running it on Openshift.
>
> The downside of this approach, that it needs a bit of discipline to move
> the cards to "Active review",
> "Waiting for contributor" or "Ready to merge", but since the ticked is
> archived when the PR is closed
> no matter in what list is it in, there should not be too much mess.
>
> The most important step is moving the ticked between "New", "Needs review"
> and "Active review",
> as this helps folks seeing what was not touched yet.
>
> How do you feel about this approach?
>
> [1] - Foreman Deep-Dive on PR process           -
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKWw349rQwE
> [2] - Katello Pull-Requests Board               -
> https://trello.com/board/katello-pull-requests/519b4226fdc9a46b1c002dbb
> [3] - Dominic Openshift fork of puppet-webhooks -
> https://github.com/domcleal/puppet-webhooks/tree/openshift
>
> -- Ivan
>
> _______________________________________________
> katello-devel mailing list
> katello-devel at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/katello-devel/attachments/20130521/51394752/attachment.htm>