www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 12254] New: Github interaction improvement proposals (via user.js or addins)

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254

           Summary: Github interaction improvement proposals (via user.js
                    or addins)
           Product: D
           Version: D2
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P2
         Component: websites
        AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: andrej.mitrovich gmail.com



08:26:14 PST ---
Vladimir Panteleev is working on something to improve our experience with using
Github, since it's really lacking some needed features.

Here we can list our enhancement requests. Some off the top of my head:

- currently you can't filter through pulls assigned to you or to anyone else
for that matter. It only works when you have Issues enabled in a repository (we
don't for D-related projects).

- you can't designate one pull being blocked by another pull (e.g. when a DMD
pull needs a Druntime/Phobos pull being merged first).

- you can't mark a pull as being stalled by something. E.g. maybe it needs more
work to be done, but simply closing it means it can get lost forever.

- you can't mark a pull as already being fully reviewed and ready to merge.
Maybe it just needs a rebase.

- you can't filter through closed pulls where you can tell whether a pull was
closed because it was merged, or it was closed but not merged.

- displaying the current autotester results next to each pull in the pull
request listing page would be good to have, rather than to have to open each
pull to see the current results. You can view a list of pulls in the
autotester, but they don't have a pull title and I hate having to use 2
websites for the same task.

- is a pull request trivial or more elaborate? you can't mark a pull as being
trivial, although you can use naming conventions.

- timers: you sometimes ping the author of a pull request for an update (you
request edits or a rebase), but the author seems to have vanished. You really
want to be notified within some timeframe (say 2 weeks) if the author hasn't
responded yet, so someone else can take over the work and continue with another
new pull request. Otherwise the pull can easily stay stale for an entire year
simply because nobody noticed the author is gone or isn't working on the pull
anymore.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 25 2014
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254


Vladimir Panteleev <thecybershadow gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |thecybershadow gmail.com
         AssignedTo|nobody puremagic.com        |thecybershadow gmail.com


-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 25 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254




12:50:20 PST ---
- A checklist of questions which should be answered before merging. Sometimes a
pull request is merged because discussions tend to drown out all the questions,
it's hard to keep track which questions were resolved and which ones were not.
If we had a way of marking questions (comments) as important they could show up
at the top, and later we could mark them as resolved when they're answered.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 27 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254




12:54:58 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=1332)
screenshot

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 27 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254




12:55:16 PST ---


 - A checklist of questions which should be answered before merging. Sometimes a
 pull request is merged because discussions tend to drown out all the questions,
 it's hard to keep track which questions were resolved and which ones were not.
 If we had a way of marking questions (comments) as important they could show up
 at the top, and later we could mark them as resolved when they're answered.




 Created an attachment (id=1332) [details]
 screenshot


Posted a screenshot to see what I mean.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 27 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254




22:58:13 EET ---
I think the important fact is that currently, reviewers must scan the entire
discussion for every pull every time they are making a pass through the pull
request list. This can be solved by allowing reviewers to assign a status to
each pull, e.g.:
- open questions (there are unanswered questions to the pull author)
- WIP (there is a problem with the patch that needs to be fixed)
- under review (just needs more LGTMs)

The status is reset when some activity occurs on the pull, implying that the
pull's status needs to be reevaluated.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 27 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254




13:00:08 PST ---


 I think the important fact is that currently, reviewers must scan the entire
 discussion for every pull every time they are making a pass through the pull
 request list. This can be solved by allowing reviewers to assign a status to
 each pull, e.g.:
 - open questions (there are unanswered questions to the pull author)
 - WIP (there is a problem with the patch that needs to be fixed)
 - under review (just needs more LGTMs)
 
 The status is reset when some activity occurs on the pull, implying that the
 pull's status needs to be reevaluated.


Yes. Honestly I have no idea what Github is doing these days, they blog about
hiring new people all the time, but are they implementing features or just
drinking beer in pubs around the world? (sometimes I feel like they're hosting
a traveling show).

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 27 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254


yebblies <yebblies gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |yebblies gmail.com



I'm not sure about this, but we could try enabling issues on the repositories. 
This would let us tag and assign pull requests, and the autotester could tag
pulls as passing/failing.  We could even have a bot that could tag pulls as
stale if they have been in the 'needs work' state for > n weeks etc.

The downside is that people might start reporting actual issues there instead
of here, but it might be worth the extra bookkeeping.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 28 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254




15:26:47 EET ---


 I'm not sure about this, but we could try enabling issues on the repositories. 
 This would let us tag and assign pull requests, and the autotester could tag
 pulls as passing/failing.  We could even have a bot that could tag pulls as
 stale if they have been in the 'needs work' state for > n weeks etc.


I think that would make sense only if it solved all or almost all of the
problems.


 The downside is that people might start reporting actual issues there instead
 of here, but it might be worth the extra bookkeeping.


I think there's some file you can add to the repository that'll be displayed
automatically when attempting to file a new issue. This can direct users to
Bugzilla.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 28 2014
prev sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12254








 I'm not sure about this, but we could try enabling issues on the repositories. 
 This would let us tag and assign pull requests, and the autotester could tag
 pulls as passing/failing.  We could even have a bot that could tag pulls as
 stale if they have been in the 'needs work' state for > n weeks etc.


 
 I think that would make sense only if it solved all or almost all of the
 problems.
 


Well, decent tagging and search does seem to cover most of these.


 
 I think there's some file you can add to the repository that'll be displayed
 automatically when attempting to file a new issue. This can direct users to
 Bugzilla.


That would work.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 28 2014