Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jetty-dev] Github Pull Request Policies
Jesse,

Whatever the policy, I think we should use labels to communicate that we have looked at an issue and action is required on the contributor... rather that the PR is just sitting there.

Currently I think we have looked at most of the PR that have been submitted, and most could be labelled with something like:
  • More Info Required
  • Coding Standards Violations
  • Question
cheers
 



On 3 May 2016 at 04:01, Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

We are accumulating some pull requests that are lingering around for a while, many of which we simply can not process because they don't pass the validation.


I started gathering together some additional process steps into the documentation and ended it which a section on our Github Policies.  My intent is that once we have this fleshed out that we can start linking directly to it in pull requests to help people see exactly what and why we do things we do, from the back and forth discussions to closing pull requests without applying them.

This is the meat of the changes:

-------
Our Policies

We wholeheartedly welcome contributions to Jetty and will do our best to process them in a timely fashion. While not every contribution will be accepted as is our commitment is to work with interested parties on the things they care about. With that in mind, short of some simple contributions we can only handle pull requests with actively engaged parties. We reserve the right to abandon pull requests whose authors do no respond in a timely fashion. We will generally adhere to the following time frames for contributions.

Invalid Pull Requests - 1 week
* These pull requests do not follow the contribution requirements for some reason, be it missing contributor agreement or the wrong email.
* We will try and follow up with the pull request author to resolve the issue but much of this is out of our hands and are between committer and the Eclipse Foundation.
* If we do not hear from the contributor after a week we will close the pull request.

Valid Pull Requests - 2 weeks
* These pull requests have a green check mark after the commit title.
* If the pull request can be immediately applied we will do so.
* There may need to be some conversation on the issue in which case a committer will follow up with the author in the pull request.
* If the original contributor does not respond within 2 weeks we may close the commit.
* If we see value in the commit yet the author has not responded after 2 weeks we may make some variation of the commit ourselves.

------

The stated timelines might be a bit aggressive but it is just an initial draft and I am hoping we can have a bit of back and forth on it here that I can further capture into the page.  I am thinking that I'll have a direct link to both invalid and valid pull requests so that we can past in a simple link in each pull request should we need to close the issue.  We'll have another direct link for the common case of invalid signed commit that we can generally use to help people fix the problem themselves.

Thoughts?
Jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
jetty-dev mailing list
jetty-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-dev



--

Back to the top