llvm dev - Mar 2019 - [cfe-dev] [lldb-dev] [GitHub] RFC: Enforcing no merge commit policy

It sounds like we need to get someone from the Foundation (chandlerc@,
lattner@, tanya@, someone else?) to reach out to them offline about this.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:23 AM Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer at
gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 2:19 PM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> On 03/20/2019 10:41 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:00 PM Tom Stellard via lldb-dev <
>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at
lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     Hi,
>> >
>> >     I would like to follow up on the previous thread[1], where
there
>> was a consensus
>> >     to disallow merge commits in the llvm github repository, and
start
>> a discussion
>> >     about how we should enforce this policy.
>> >
>> >     Unfortunately, GitHub does not provide a convenient way to
fully
>> enforce this policy.
>> >
>> >
>> > Why isn't this enforceable with a server-side pre-receive
hook?
>>
>> GitHub[1] only supports pre-receive hooks in the 'Enterprise
Server'
>> plan, which is for self-hosted github instances.
>>
>
> AIUI, the GitHub team is perfectly willing to help out the LLVM project in
> whatever way LLVM needs, including but not limited to turning on
> server-side hooks for us.
> https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1086470665832607746
>
> Server-side hooks are *the *answer to this problem. There is no problem.
> You just use a server-side hook.
>
> (Whether or not to use GitHub PRs is an orthogonal question. You can use
> hooks with PRs, or hooks without PRs; PRs with hooks, or PRs without
hooks.)
>
> –Arthur
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190320/932502cd/attachment.html>

On 03/20/2019 11:38 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
> It sounds like we need to get someone from the Foundation (chandlerc@,
lattner@, tanya@, someone else?) to reach out to them offline about this.
> 
Yes, we will try to reach out to GitHub directly about this, but I still
think we need some kind of contingency plan in case pre-receive hooks
or even a new kind of branch protection won't be an option for us.

-Tom
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:23 AM Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer at
gmail.com <mailto:arthur.j.odwyer at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 2:19 PM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> 
>         On 03/20/2019 10:41 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
>         >
>         > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:00 PM Tom Stellard via lldb-dev
<lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>
<mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at
lists.llvm.org>>> wrote:
>         >
>         >     Hi,
>         >
>         >     I would like to follow up on the previous thread[1], where
there was a consensus
>         >     to disallow merge commits in the llvm github repository,
and start a discussion
>         >     about how we should enforce this policy.
>         >
>         >     Unfortunately, GitHub does not provide a convenient way to
fully enforce this policy.
>         >
>         > 
>         > Why isn't this enforceable with a server-side pre-receive
hook?
> 
>         GitHub[1] only supports pre-receive hooks in the 'Enterprise
Server'
>         plan, which is for self-hosted github instances.
> 
> 
>     AIUI, the GitHub team is perfectly willing to help out the LLVM project
in whatever way LLVM needs, including but not limited to turning on server-side
hooks for us.
>     https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1086470665832607746
> 
>     Server-side hooks are *the *answer to this problem. There is no
problem. You just use a server-side hook.
> 
>     (Whether or not to use GitHub PRs is an orthogonal question. You can
use hooks with PRs, or hooks without PRs; PRs with hooks, or PRs without hooks.)
> 
>     –Arthur
>

Excuse my ignorance (I'm not great with Git) but how would it differ for
workflows of people
who use a Git repository for local work but still use `svn up + patch + svn
commit <list of
files>` to actually land post CR or for NFC patches, while resolving
conflicts during a
pull into a local (non-trunk) branch manually, after the eventual full switch to
GitHub?

I'm aware that SVN operates using the lock model as opposed to Git
essentially making the
history linear; Are merge commits multiple commits that are landed as part of a
single
Git "push" (ie. unsquashed), or attempts to do anything that would
result in a creation
or merging of a branch on the remote?

Thank you.

On 3/20/2019 6:53 PM, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev wrote:
> On 03/20/2019 11:38 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
>> It sounds like we need to get someone from the Foundation (chandlerc@,
lattner@, tanya@, someone else?) to reach out to them offline about this.
>>
> 
> Yes, we will try to reach out to GitHub directly about this, but I still
> think we need some kind of contingency plan in case pre-receive hooks
> or even a new kind of branch protection won't be an option for us.
> 
> -Tom
> 
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:23 AM Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer
at gmail.com <mailto:arthur.j.odwyer at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 2:19 PM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev
<cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
wrote:
>>
>>         On 03/20/2019 10:41 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
>>         >
>>         > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:00 PM Tom Stellard via lldb-dev
<lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>
<mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at
lists.llvm.org>>> wrote:
>>         >
>>         >     Hi,
>>         >
>>         >     I would like to follow up on the previous thread[1],
where there was a consensus
>>         >     to disallow merge commits in the llvm github
repository, and start a discussion
>>         >     about how we should enforce this policy.
>>         >
>>         >     Unfortunately, GitHub does not provide a convenient
way to fully enforce this policy.
>>         >
>>         > 
>>         > Why isn't this enforceable with a server-side
pre-receive hook?
>>
>>         GitHub[1] only supports pre-receive hooks in the
'Enterprise Server'
>>         plan, which is for self-hosted github instances.
>>
>>
>>     AIUI, the GitHub team is perfectly willing to help out the LLVM
project in whatever way LLVM needs, including but not limited to turning on
server-side hooks for us.
>>     https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1086470665832607746
>>
>>     Server-side hooks are *the *answer to this problem. There is no
problem. You just use a server-side hook.
>>
>>     (Whether or not to use GitHub PRs is an orthogonal question. You
can use hooks with PRs, or hooks without PRs; PRs with hooks, or PRs without
hooks.)
>>
>>     –Arthur
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3992 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190320/149ac433/attachment.bin>