[petsc-dev] Our pull request work flow is terrible and horrible

[Scott Kruger]

On 1/11/18 10:40 AM, Patrick Sanan wrote:
> One idea is to impose a stricter guideline that things on the bitbucket 
> PR page are things that everyone is actively trying to merge. That way, 
> maintainers can just look at the bottom of the list to see what's 
> lagging, instead of having to to work up the list and try to remember 
> which of the PRs are WIP or proposals or experiments or even abandoned 
> ideas.
> 
> This probably requires an itchier trigger finger on declining PRs which 
> need substantial work.
> 
> A related point is that (as happened with the last PR I made), if a big 
> edit is performed after the original PR is made or even approved, then 
> it's not always clear "whose court" the PR is in. Maybe it's better to 
> just make a new PR in this situation. I'm not sure if bitbucket allows 
> you to decline your own PR (I fear not) - that would make this easier.

You can.



My own suggest is to hook bin/maint/exampleslog.py up to the
nightly runs such that the output is on the main testing
page and even, perhaps, an automated email to the people
who are "responsible".   I am unclear how the nightly
workflow works -- if there is a description somewhere, I
can try hooking it up myself.

The goal is to distribute the responsibility for fixing
errors in master/next testing, and to make it easier to
see what the problems are (without parsing two dozen log
files).

Scott



-- 
Tech-X Corporation               kruger at txcorp.com
5621 Arapahoe Ave, Suite A       Phone: (720) 974-1841
Boulder, CO 80303                Fax:   (303) 448-7756