Re: [jbosstools-dev] Assigning JIRAs w/ patches for review

----- Original Message ----- > Pull Request Pending is very clear when the request is still pending. > > It is less clear when you're doing searches for all pull requests > that > made it in targeted to version x.y.z.AlphaBetaGamma37 If it's pending, the pull request has not been processed and therefore wouldn't be in a targeted version.

For us, the person doing the pushing is responsible for resolving the JIRA. I suspect you'll probably want to mark the JIRA as pushed and assign it to QA for testing. > > On 10/03/2012 12:20 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >> On 02 Oct 2012, at 16:47, Rob Cernich <rcernich(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> On the SwitchYard side of things, we use "Link Pull Request" in >>> our JIRA workflow. Typically, we just use this to indicate work >>> is complete and ready to be pulled and use Github to actually >>> manage the pull requests (i.e. I don't think anybody looks at >>> JIRA to determine what changes need to be pulled). Once the pull >>> request is sent, most of the review comments take place in the >>> context of the pull request on github. I think other groups use >>> gist, but I'm not familiar with it. >> gist ?! how does that work ? >> >>>> Even in Git I still feel the labels don't take much time and do >>>> make >>>> stuff much more clear. >> How can "Pull request pending" be less clear than the label ? >> >> wouldn't it be rather redundant ? >> >> /max >> >>>> But I can understand if people think it's not >>>> worth the effort. >>>> >>>> On 10/01/2012 09:50 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >>>>> we got that process in place for github - for svn its different >>>>> since no "pull requests". >>>>> >>>>> I would say since we are moving to git anyway not worth coming >>>>> up >>>>> witha new jira workflow for this is there? >>>>> >>>>> /max >>>>> >>>>> On 28 Sep 2012, at 23:30, Denis Golovin <xden(a)exadel.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Sounds like something that could be implemented in JIRA as >>>>>> custom >>>>>> workflow. >>>>>> "Review" state should be added in JIRA workflow between >>>>>> "Resolved" >>>>>> and "Open"/"Reopened". Devs after submitting pull request moves >>>>>> it to "Review" (does it possible to provide link to pull >>>>>> request?) and assign to a reviewer. Reviewer can review changes >>>>>> in pull request and apply/merge them then move issue to >>>>>> "Resolved", if something is wrong move it to "Reopened". >>>>>> >>>>>> Not sure if we have rights in JIRA to create and assign >>>>>> new/custom >>>>>> workflow to JBossTools project. >>>>>> >>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>> >>>>>> Denis >>>>>> Sent from my Google Nexus Phone >>>>>> >>>>>> Nick Boldt <nboldt(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Rob proposed an idea for facilitating tracking of patches for >>>>>>> review, >>>>>>> using the "review" label in JIRA. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here's how that would work. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. you work on a JIRA >>>>>>> 2. you attach a patch >>>>>>> 3. you add the "review" label to the JIRA >>>>>>> 4. you assign the JIRA to the correct reviewer (eg., Max, >>>>>>> Denis, >>>>>>> Len...) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When reviewed & approved: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. reviewer signs their approval in the JIRA >>>>>>> 2. reviewer assigns the JIRA back to the person who attached >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> patch >>>>>>> 3. review changes the label from "review" to "review_approved" >>>>>>> 4. you then commit the change and mark the JIRA resolved, so >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> QE can >>>>>>> then later mark it resolved when verified. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you'd like to see an example query with these labels, check >>>>>>> this out: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Want to query for issues assigned to YOU to review or which >>>>>>> you've >>>>>>> approved? Use "assignee = currentUser()" in your queries: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/secure/IssueNavigator!executeAdvanced.jspa?jqlQu... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What do you think? Good idea? Process overkill? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat >>>>>>> Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio >>>>>>> http://nick.divbyzero.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list >>>>>>> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list >>>>>> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list >>>>> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list >>>> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jbosstools-dev mailing list >>> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbosstools-dev mailing list >> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > jbosstools-dev mailing list > jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev > _______________________________________________ jbosstools-dev mailing list jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev