Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@anjohnson
Last active August 29, 2015 14:25
Show Gist options
  • Save anjohnson/544591e671b03f1a3131 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save anjohnson/544591e671b03f1a3131 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Github pull request handling for the EPICS V4 Working Group

Github pull request handling for the EPICS V4 Working Group

  • Module owners may commit and push minor changes directly to the master branch of their own modules on github.
  • For major changes that should be tested and reviewed by other people, module owners should work in a private repository and create a pull request when the work is ready for review.
  • Anybody may create or comment on a pull request on any module -- this includes unsolicited contributions from non-members.
  • A module's owner normally makes the final decision on merging pull requests for their modules and performs the merge (in many cases this just means pushing the green Merge button on the pull request webpage and confirming the merge).
  • A meeting of the working group may nominate someone other than a module's owner to perform merge operations for specific changes discussed by the group.
  • Large or API-changing modifications should never be merged without allowing time for discussion, which should happen through the github comment facility on the specific pull request, not on the pvdata-devel mailing list.
  • Minimum discussion periods for pull requests may vary in length depending on the size and significance of the change being proposed, and the amount of discussion that actually takes place. A module owner should not accept a pull request just to terminate ongoing discussion about it.
  • Our group members are spread out over many different countries and timezones. Everyone should get at minimum a full working day to respond to a pull request, allowing for weekends and local public holidays.
  • Group members who review a pull request for someone else's module may add a comment to that effect, e.g. "Review: Approve" or "Review: OK".
  • Disapproval comments deserve more discussion, but if you don't have time to write them immediately, something like "Review: Hold" should warn the module owner to await further feedback before merging.

Draft 2: ANJ 2015-08-21

@anjohnson
Copy link
Author

Do these changes make the meaning clearer?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment