Better management between GitHub and Google Code
Aaron S. Meurer
- People forget to reference the issue number on the pull request or the pull request on the issue. The best case is that I notice this and fix it, but it's possible that people don't even realize that there is an issue for the pull request or visa versa.
- Even when people remember to reference the pull request on the issue, either they forget or don't have permissions to add the NeedsReview and username labels. I think this can be partially fixed by making sure that all regular contributors are members in the Google Code project so that they can add labels to issues. I used to be able to handle this manually pretty easily, but lately the traffic has increased by quite a bit (because of the GSoC students) and it's getting harder to manage. Ironically, this makes the labels even more essential.
- People forget to check the corresponding issue before pushing in a pull request, like as happened with issue 2302/pull 257. I am just using this as a recent example, I am not trying to blame Chris here.
- It's easy to type the wrong issue or pull number. Pull 257 is also an example of this (and again, I don't want to blame anyone here; the point is that typos are easy to make).
Does anyone know if it would be possible to have some kind of more automated system, where most or all of the above are done automatically? In particular, it would be nice if the following could be automated:
- If a pull request is created, then the issue should be marked as NeedsReview with a label of the person's name. This could be based on referencing an issue number in a pull request.
- If someone puts the NeedsBetterPatch or even PassedReview label on an issue, the pull request should be notified.
- All pull requests should have an issue, I think. Maybe something could warn someone if they forgot to reference an issue number in a pull request, and ask them if they want to create a new issue for it, or reference an already existing one.
- In the pull requests, automatically change "issue 1234" to "[issue 1234: solve(4**x-x**4, x) (and similar) should give all solutions](http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1234)", or add that as a new comment. This would make it so that you could see the issue title, which would let you verify that the number was correct, and it also would auto-link it, which would make navigation easier.
With that, you would just have to make sure that you reference the issue number in the pull request (it could also parse commit messages), and the rest would be taken care of.
I'm thinking this should be done by some kind of bot somewhere, but even a script that you run from your computer and goes through and it does it from your account (after checking to see if it has already been done or not) would work.
I'm putting out a request to the community, because I don't know how to program such a thing. Does this sound like a good idea? Does it sound feasible?
Aaron Meurer
Haz
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
Aaron S. Meurer
Haz
Aaron S. Meurer
Mateusz Paprocki
Integration with pull requests- https://github.com/blog/712-pull-requests-2-0
New issue stuff:
Haz
Aaron S. Meurer
Haz
Vinzent Steinberg
can think of, so maybe we should really consider a move.
BTW, I just read [1], so there is a gist API, we can consider it for
sympy-bot.
Vinzent
[1] https://github.com/blog/846-new-issues-and-gist-api
On Apr 29, 10:16 pm, Haz <christian.mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > We could also use the tools that that script uses (http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/IssueTrackerAPI
>
> > Aaron Meurer
>
> > On Apr 29, 2011, at 1:49 PM, Haz wrote:
>
> > -https://github.com/cfinke/googlecode2github
>
> > <https://github.com/cfinke/googlecode2github> ?
>
>
> >> Well, it does indeed seem that they've improved.
>
> >> Show me a way to transfer issues from Google Code to GitHub, and you may
> >> have sold me.
>
> >> Aaron Meurer
>
> >> On Apr 29, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Haz wrote:
>
> >> Integration with pull requests
> >> -https://github.com/blog/712-pull-requests-2-0
>
> >> New issue stuff:
> >> -https://github.com/blog/831-issues-2-0-the-next-generation
>
>
>
> >>> Well, first off, I'm not even sure if that would solve the problem. How
> >>> well does GitHub integrate their issues with their pull requests.
>
> >>> Anyway, the conditions for moving to any other issue tracker would be:
>
> >>> - It would need to be at least as powerful as Google Code. Ideally, if
> >>> we are going through the hassle to move, it should be more powerful. This
> >>> is talking about things like labels and stuff (I'd need to check to see how
> >>> good GitHub is with this).
>
> >>> - We would need to transfer all the current issues over to the new
> >>> tracker, keeping all numbers the same. This is the most important one, and
> >>> also the most difficult. It's important because we have references to issue
> >>> numbers *everywhere*: in the code, in the commit log, in the mailing list,
> >>> etc.
>
> >>> Currently, Google Code makes it kind of hard to export the issues (you
> >>> have to do it manually; there's no xml or svn output).
>
> >>> Personally, I'm pretty content with the Google Code issue tracker, other
> >>> than the issues I mentioned below. It works well, and has some nice
> >>> features (like the advanced search).
>
> >>> I haven't played with GitHub's issue tracker too much, but from what I
> >>> saw, it isn't as good (yet).
>
> >>> Aaron Meurer
>
> >>> On Apr 29, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Haz wrote:
>
> >>> What were the road-blocks from moving the issues to github again?
>
Aaron S. Meurer
Also, the default labels functionality doesn't seem to be as strong. It also doesn't seem to have the ability to automatically do things based on labels (like in Google Code, we send updates of issues with the review labels to the patches list).
Aaron Meurer
Haz
Aaron S. Meurer
Vinzent Steinberg
> Technically, Google Code has a better tag system, because it lets you have tags like our Priority, Status, and Type that can only take one value per issue.
> Also, the default labels functionality doesn't seem to be as strong. It also doesn't seem to have the ability to automatically do things based on labels (like in Google Code, we send updates of issues with the review labels to the patches list).
Also we wouldn't need it, because on github pull request are tied
closely enough with the issues. Everyone who wants an email can tell
github to send one for every pull request.
Vinzent
Aaron S. Meurer
It also means that they consider pull requests to *be* issues, which is a little different from how we have been treating them (for example, we can close pull requests and reopen them, but issues should only be closed when they are fixed).
Aaron Meurer