<div dir="ltr">How do we get the following tags in the commit message?<br><br> > Smoke: Gluster Build System <<a href="mailto:jenkins@build.gluster.org">jenkins@build.gluster.org</a>><br> > NetBSD-regression: NetBSD Build System <<a href="mailto:jenkins@build.gluster.org">jenkins@build.gluster.org</a>><br> > CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <<a href="mailto:jenkins@build.gluster.org">jenkins@build.gluster.org</a>><br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Niels de Vos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ndevos@redhat.com" target="_blank">ndevos@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 02:21:23PM +0530, Nigel Babu wrote:<br>
> I've said on this thread before, none of this is easy to do. It needs us to<br>
> fork Gerrit to make our own changes. I would argue that depending on the<br>
> data from the commit message is folly.<br>
<br>
</span>Eventhough we all seem to agree that statistics based on commit messages<br>
is not correct, it looks like it is an incentive to get reviewing valued<br>
more. We need to promote the reviewing work somehow, and this is one way<br>
to do it.<br>
<br>
Forking Gerrit is surely not the right thing. But could it not get<br>
discussed with the rest of the Gerrit community? I hope that the Gerrit<br>
admins follow the Gerrit project and know how to report feature requests<br>
or such?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Niels<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Niels de Vos <<a href="mailto:ndevos@redhat.com">ndevos@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:01:43PM +0530, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:<br>
> > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Michael Adam <<a href="mailto:obnox@samba.org">obnox@samba.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > On 2016-10-05 at 09:45 -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:<br>
> > > > > "Feedback-given-by: <nosy.person@silly.place>"<br>
> > > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > Niels/Nigel,<br>
> > > Is this easier to do?<br>
> ><br>
> > No idea if this can be done by a Gerrit configuration, I'm not an admin<br>
> > there :)<br>
> ><br>
> > I suspect Gerrit gives the option to run a script after someone pressed<br>
> > the [submit] button for merging, and before the actual commit is pushed<br>
> > into the branch. If there is no config option, such a hook-script could<br>
> > be made to work. But, my Gerrit experience on that level is<br>
> > non-existent, so I can be completely wrong.<br>
> ><br>
> > Niels<br>
> ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > I like that one - thanks! :-)<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Michael<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----<br>
> > > > > > On 2016-09-30 at 17:52 +0200, Niels de Vos wrote:<br>
> > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 08:50:12PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:<br>
> > > > > > > > On 09/30/2016 06:38 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:<br>
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:11:51AM +0530, Pranith Kumar<br>
> > Karampuri<br>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:<br>
> > > > > > > ...<br>
> > > > > > > > > Maybe we can add an additional tag that mentions all the<br>
> > people<br>
> > > > that<br>
> > > > > > > > > did do reviews of older versions of the patch. Not sure what<br>
> > the<br>
> > > > tag<br>
> > > > > > > > > would be, maybe just CC?<br>
> > > > > > > > It depends on what tags would be processed to obtain<br>
> > statistics on<br>
> > > > review<br>
> > > > > > > > contributions.<br>
> > > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > > Real statistics would come from Gerrit, not from the 'git log'<br>
> > > > output.<br>
> > > > > > > We do have a ./extras/who-wrote-glusterfs/ in the sources, but<br>
> > that<br>
> > > > is<br>
> > > > > > > only to get an idea about the changes that were made and should<br>
> > not<br>
> > > > be<br>
> > > > > > > used for serious statistics.<br>
> > > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > > It is possible to feed the Gerrit comment-stream into things like<br>
> > > > > > > Elasticsearch and get an accurate impression how many reviews<br>
> > people<br>
> > > > do<br>
> > > > > > > (and much more). I hope we can get some contribution diagrams<br>
> > from<br>
> > > > > > > someting like this at one point.<br>
> > > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > > Would some kind of Gave-feedback tag for people that left a<br>
> > comment<br>
> > > > on<br>
> > > > > > > earlier versions of the patch be appreciated by others? It will<br>
> > show<br>
> > > > in<br>
> > > > > > > the 'git log' who was involved in some way or form.<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > I think this would be fair.<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > Reviewed-by tags should imho be reserved for the final<br>
> > > > > > incarnation of the patch. Those mean that the person named<br>
> > > > > > in the tag has aproved this version of the patch for getting<br>
> > > > > > into the official tree. A previous version of the patch can<br>
> > > > > > have been entirely different, so a reviewed-by for that<br>
> > > > > > previous version may not actually apply to the new version at all<br>
> > > > > > and hence create a false impression!<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > It is also difficult to track all activities by tags,<br>
> > > > > > and anyone who wants to measure performance and contributions<br>
> > > > > > only by looking at git commit tags will not be doing several<br>
> > > > > > people justice. We could add 'discussed-with' or 'designed-by'<br>
> > > > > > tags, etc ... ;-)<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > On a serious note, in Samba we use 'Pair-programmed-with' tags,<br>
> > > > > > because we do pair-programming a lot, but only one person can<br>
> > > > > > be an author of a git commit ...<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > The 'Gave-feedback' tag I do like. even though it does<br>
> > > > > > not quite match with the foobar-by pattern of other tags.<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > Michael<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> > > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list<br>
> > > > > > <a href="mailto:Gluster-devel@gluster.org">Gluster-devel@gluster.org</a><br>
> > > > > > <a href="http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.gluster.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel</a><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> > > > maintainers mailing list<br>
> > > > <a href="mailto:maintainers@gluster.org">maintainers@gluster.org</a><br>
> > > > <a href="http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.gluster.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/maintainers</a><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > --<br>
> > > Pranith<br>
> ><br>
> > > ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> > > maintainers mailing list<br>
> > > <a href="mailto:maintainers@gluster.org">maintainers@gluster.org</a><br>
> > > <a href="http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.gluster.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/maintainers</a><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> > maintainers mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:maintainers@gluster.org">maintainers@gluster.org</a><br>
> > <a href="http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.gluster.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/maintainers</a><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> nigelb<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Pranith<br></div></div>
</div>