[wildfly-dev] Tyr - pull request format checker

[Martin Stefanko]

Thanks Darran, all valid suggestions.

I've moved the document to my personal public account [1] - it should be
accessible to anyone now.

I will incorporate your suggestions in the gist.

[1]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13DScS-WyQipblfDG-hjFJ12mQ7OM18TsAY-vIo6qAr8/edit?usp=sharing

Thank you,
Martin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:54 PM Darran Lofthouse <
darran.lofthouse at jboss.com> wrote:

> As an open source project may be better to document somewhere visible to
> the community.
>
> From the initial rules I would suggest drop the "NO JIRA REQUIRED" from
> commit messages and PR titles, the commit messages and potentially the
> titles end up in the history of the project and have no meaning outside of
> the tool.
>
> At the moment it looks like the template only covers WildFly so may need a
> second template to cover WildFly Core.
>
> I think from the perspective of the tool making it mandatory for each
> commit in the PR to contain a Jira ID either with or without the brackets
> is fine - unless you want to guarantee whitespace around the Jira ID maybe
> the regular expression could be simplified to ignore the brackets.
>
> Also I think it is reasonable for the tool to expect a link in each PR
> which should also relate to the project the PR is against.
>
> Regards,
> Darran Lofthouse.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 11:35 AM Martin Stefanko <mstefank at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> For the demo I've started with this
>> <https://gist.github.com/xstefank/3a79f2f199ee1e449a44c607120a9d30>. For
>> additional checks I have only something to verify that issue in title
>> matches the link in the description. Any ideas are welcome!
>>
>> I was also thinking about making distinction between issues / bugs and
>> features if that would be useful.
>>
>> I've created a google document to track this -
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZuD5fyOlGTVDh96jiuM6jTdofm4fG6gZqdfBNRdZp8I/edit?usp=sharing
>> .
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 11:10 AM Darran Lofthouse <
>> darran.lofthouse at jboss.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Do we have somewhere yet that we can start to look into an initial set
>>> of rules to discuss what the initial set should be?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 6:32 AM Martin Stefanko <mstefank at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > The time the cross becomes a problem is if we adopt a set of
>>>> verification rules that we know will regularly trigger a failure to be
>>>> ignored, if the failure cases to be ignored are truly exceptional cases
>>>> then the cross will be useful.
>>>>
>>>> It would be beneficial to adjust rules as we'll see how useful they are
>>>> as time progresses. Configuration of rules is external to the service so it
>>>> will be possible.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 5:49 PM Darran Lofthouse <
>>>> darran.lofthouse at jboss.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > OTOH if the mergers decide they want to do something I don't want a
>>>>>> tool preventing us doing it, which is what my questions were driving at.
>>>>>> We're way smarter than the tool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The status should not prevent a possibility of merge but if the cross
>>>>>> next to the commit would be a problem we can add an override to disable tyr
>>>>>> check (meaning make it pass manually) with a comment or similar as
>>>>>> suggested above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The time the cross becomes a problem is if we adopt a set of
>>>>> verification rules that we know will regularly trigger a failure to be
>>>>> ignored, if the failure cases to be ignored are truly exceptional cases
>>>>> then the cross will be useful.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20190410/9b3ae36c/attachment.html