[Pulp-dev] [noissue] considered harmful

[David Davis]

When we added commit validation to our CI, we created a loophole that would
allow small changes like typo fixes to not have a redmine issue or
changelog entry. By having '[noissue]' in the commit message, users could
bypass our commit requirements. However, this loophole is not being used as
intended--it's being used for all sorts of changes from new features to bug
fixes.

This is going to be a major problem for users and plugin writers when we
release 3.0 and they start to upgrade from release to release. These
[noissue] changes won't being reflected in our changelog which invalidates
the motivation behind having a changelog.

My first inkling is to remove the '[noissue]' functionality. Other projects
like Katello and foreman already do this. If you don't want your change
reflected in the changelog, you should be creating .misc entries for these
changes in the CHANGES folder. The downside to this is every change will
require a changelog and issue, and this creates extra steps for devs and
contributors.

Another option is to make our check smarter by incorporating some other
condition(s) or metric(s). For example, perhaps we could allow [noissue]
changes only to certain directories like our tests directory. The problem
here is getting the parameters right. What sorts of changes changes should
we allow to be [noissue] ones? I've thought about this a bit and couldn't
think of a good set of criteria.

Thoughts?

David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20191106/1a095357/attachment.htm>