[petsc-dev] Handling pull requests in a better way

[Stefano Zampini]

I would also add --with-clanguage=C++



2018-03-01 19:03 GMT+03:00 Smith, Barry F. <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov>:

>
>
> > On Mar 1, 2018, at 8:36 AM, Patrick Sanan <patrick.sanan at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Proposed addition to https://bitbucket.org/petsc/
> petsc/wiki/Home#markdown-header-contributing-to-petsc :
> >
> > """
> > Suggestions for a smooth review of your contributed code:
> >
> > - If adding features, include tests which cover them.
> > - Test your changes by running with valgrind (use `--download-mpich` to
> obtain a valgrind-clean MPI implementation).
> > - Test your changes with non-standard configurations of PETSc (in
> particular, `--with-precision=single` and `--with-scalar-type=complex`).
>
>    Also add -with-64bit-indices
>
> > - If your contribution can be logically decomposed into 2 or more
> separate contributions, submit them in sequence instead of all at once.
>
>
>    Looks good, go ahead and add these.
>
> > """
> >
> > 2018-03-01 15:10 GMT+01:00 Patrick Sanan <patrick.sanan at gmail.com>:
> > A simple way to proceed would be to advise submitters to submit their
> "atomic" PRs in a valid order. If change B depends on change A, then submit
> A first, wait until merged, and then submit B. This would have the nice
> side effect of not overwhelming the integrators.
> >
> > 2018-03-01 15:04 GMT+01:00 Vaclav Hapla <vaclav.hapla at erdw.ethz.ch>:
> >
> >
> >> 1. 3. 2018 v 14:04, Patrick Sanan <patrick.sanan at gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> Maybe it would also help to add more explicit instructions to the wiki (
> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/wiki/Home#markdown-
> header-contributing-to-petsc) on how to construct a branch that is likely
> to get through the integration steps quickly.
> >>
> >> I'd suggest adding language about these (and volunteer to write it),
> even if some might be obvious:
> >> - Adding tests for whatever you submit
> >> - Testing with configurations other than the usual double/real/C setup
> (complex, single)
> >> - Making the PR as small/atomic as possible (can your PR be 2 or more
> separate PRs?)
> >
> > Yes, I think it's quite common that one would like to factor out one or
> more smaller bugfixes and/or improvements from a bigger PR. But some of
> them may depend on some others, and definitely the original big PR depends
> on all of them. Perhaps it would be nice if there is some documented way of
> specifying dependendencies between PRs to insure a proper order of merging
> (I think BitBucket has no such feature?).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Vaclav
> >
> >> - Running through valgrind (using --download-mpich) before submitting
> >>
> >> 2018-03-01 12:33 GMT+01:00 Karl Rupp <rupp at iue.tuwien.ac.at>:
> >> Dear PETSc folks,
> >>
> >> I think we can do a better job when it comes to handling pull requests
> (PRs). We have several PRs piling up, which after some time (imho) get
> merged relatively carelessly instead of reaping the full benefits of a
> thorough review.
> >>
> >> In order to improve the integration of pull requests, I propose to
> nominate a PR integrator, who is a-priori responsible for *all* incoming
> PRs. The PR integrator is free to delegate a particular PR integration to
> someone with the relevant domain-specific knowledge (e.g. Matt for
> DMPlex-related things) by appropriate comments on Bitbucket. In case of
> delays, the PR integrator is also responsible for issuing reminders over
> time (like Barry has done in the past).
> >>
> >> The idea is to make daily progress with the PRs. One integration step
> per day (e.g. testing or merging to next) is presumably enough to handle
> the load, whereas things get messy if we let things pile up. Automated
> testing may help a bit in the future, but it doesn't release us from
> properly reviewing the contributed code.
> >>
> >> Any objections to my PR integrator proposal? Any volunteers? ;-)
> >> If nobody else wants to be the highly esteemed PR integrator, I can do
> it. ;-)
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Karli
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Stefano
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20180301/f0a90b9b/attachment.html>