Should Pull Requests be Done Against CWE-ou-minkata?

CyanWorlds.com Engine Project Management
Post Reply
Christian Walther
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:54 am

Should Pull Requests be Done Against CWE-ou-minkata?

Post by Christian Walther » Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:42 pm

Partly prompted by the exchange at https://foundry.openuru.org/fisheye/cru/CWE-7#c114, the following question comes to my mind:

In the workflow that has been evolving of late, contributions are first entered into the CWE-ou-minkata and MOULSCRIPT-ou-minkata repositories, then tested on the Minkata shard, and finally added to CWE-ou/MOULSCRIPT-ou for possible pulling by Cyan.

For a contribution that comes in as a pull request against CWE-ou, such as #5: Avatar clothing fix or #6: Basic clipboard functionality, this has two awkward consequences:
  • The pull request is left open with no activity, neither accepted nor rejected, for a long time (until the change is ready to enter CWE-ou). Prompt action on a pull request is a way of signaling recognition to the author, while long inactivity is likely to frustrate and detract contributors.
  • To get the contribution into CWE-ou-minkata for testing, it must be cherry-picked or moved around in the form of a patch. The latter in particular I consider a tedious and error-prone step, as results like the following unhelpful commit message show:
    Image
In light of that, wouldn’t it make more sense if contributions came in as pull requests against CWE-ou-minkata/MOULSCRIPT-ou-minkata? Then they could be quickly accepted after initial review, tested on Minkata at leisure, and finally simply merged into CWE-ou/MOULSCRIPT-ou. As a bonus, if the thorough review on Crucible is to happen concurrently to the Minkata testing, instead of again having to use patches to get the change into Crucible, you could simply point Crucible at the CWE-ou-minkata repository.

Post Reply

Return to “Management”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest