[VOTE] Use Upsource for Code Review

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
tool.

[ ] +1  approve
[ ] +0  no opinion
[ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)

This vote will go on for 5 days.

[1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html

[Anton Vinogradov-2]

+1

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> tool.
>
> [ ] +1  approve
> [ ] +0  no opinion
> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>
> This vote will go on for 5 days.
>
> [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
>

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Proper link to the discussion:
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > tool.
> >
> > [ ] +1  approve
> > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> >
> > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> >
>

[Sergi]

Pavel,

I'm not sure I understand the term "official code review tool", can you
please elaborate it? We will enforce everyone to register in Upsource and
use it or what?

Sergi

2016-11-16 13:22 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:

> Proper link to the discussion:
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > > tool.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > >
> > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > >
> >
>

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Sergi,

I don't think we should enforce it.
"Official" means that it will be allowed, linked and described in wiki.

It is up to contributor and reviewer to use it.
For example, if the changes are small/trivial, creating a review in
Upsource is not necessary.
If the changes are complex and contributor has not created a review,
reviewer may ask to do so.
Etc etc.

Thoughts?

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Sergi Vladykin <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Pavel,
>
> I'm not sure I understand the term "official code review tool", can you
> please elaborate it? We will enforce everyone to register in Upsource and
> use it or what?
>
> Sergi
>
> 2016-11-16 13:22 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Proper link to the discussion:
> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code
> review
> > > > tool.
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > >
> > > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[agura]

+1



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Sergi,
>
> I don't think we should enforce it.
> "Official" means that it will be allowed, linked and described in wiki.
>
> It is up to contributor and reviewer to use it.
> For example, if the changes are small/trivial, creating a review in
> Upsource is not necessary.
> If the changes are complex and contributor has not created a review,
> reviewer may ask to do so.
> Etc etc.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Sergi Vladykin <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Pavel,
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand the term "official code review tool", can you
> > please elaborate it? We will enforce everyone to register in Upsource and
> > use it or what?
> >
> > Sergi
> >
> > 2016-11-16 13:22 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Proper link to the discussion:
> > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > > Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code
> > review
> > > > > tool.
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > > >
> > > > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[Vladimir Ozerov]

+1

Way to go!

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Andrey Gura <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Sergi,
> >
> > I don't think we should enforce it.
> > "Official" means that it will be allowed, linked and described in wiki.
> >
> > It is up to contributor and reviewer to use it.
> > For example, if the changes are small/trivial, creating a review in
> > Upsource is not necessary.
> > If the changes are complex and contributor has not created a review,
> > reviewer may ask to do so.
> > Etc etc.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Sergi Vladykin <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Pavel,
> > >
> > > I'm not sure I understand the term "official code review tool", can you
> > > please elaborate it? We will enforce everyone to register in Upsource
> and
> > > use it or what?
> > >
> > > Sergi
> > >
> > > 2016-11-16 13:22 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > Proper link to the discussion:
> > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > > > Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code
> > > review
> > > > > > tool.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[dsetrakyan]

+1

I think we should allow this tool, unless it proves counter productive. If
it does, then we will drop it.

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Sergi,
>
> I don't think we should enforce it.
> "Official" means that it will be allowed, linked and described in wiki.
>
> It is up to contributor and reviewer to use it.
> For example, if the changes are small/trivial, creating a review in
> Upsource is not necessary.
> If the changes are complex and contributor has not created a review,
> reviewer may ask to do so.
> Etc etc.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Sergi Vladykin <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Pavel,
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand the term "official code review tool", can you
> > please elaborate it? We will enforce everyone to register in Upsource and
> > use it or what?
> >
> > Sergi
> >
> > 2016-11-16 13:22 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Proper link to the discussion:
> > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > > Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code
> > review
> > > > > tool.
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > > >
> > > > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[Sergi]

+1

Ok, this makes sense.

Sergi

2016-11-16 14:33 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:

> +1
>
> I think we should allow this tool, unless it proves counter productive. If
> it does, then we will drop it.
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Sergi,
> >
> > I don't think we should enforce it.
> > "Official" means that it will be allowed, linked and described in wiki.
> >
> > It is up to contributor and reviewer to use it.
> > For example, if the changes are small/trivial, creating a review in
> > Upsource is not necessary.
> > If the changes are complex and contributor has not created a review,
> > reviewer may ask to do so.
> > Etc etc.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Sergi Vladykin <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Pavel,
> > >
> > > I'm not sure I understand the term "official code review tool", can you
> > > please elaborate it? We will enforce everyone to register in Upsource
> and
> > > use it or what?
> > >
> > > Sergi
> > >
> > > 2016-11-16 13:22 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > Proper link to the discussion:
> > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > > > Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code
> > > review
> > > > > > tool.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[dmagda]

+1

—
Denis

> On Nov 16, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> tool.
>
> [ ] +1  approve
> [ ] +0  no opinion
> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>
> This vote will go on for 5 days.
>
> [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html

[Vladisav Jelisavcic]

+1 (non-binding)

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Denis Magda <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> —
> Denis
>
> > On Nov 16, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > tool.
> >
> > [ ] +1  approve
> > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> >
> > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
>
>

[Nikolai Tikhonov]

+1

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Vladisav Jelisavcic <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Denis Magda <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > —
> > Denis
> >
> > > On Nov 16, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > > tool.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > >
> > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> >
> >
>

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

What are we voting for this?

Fortunately, Apache isn't about democracy. [1]

[1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

Cos

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:08PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:

> Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> tool.
>
> [ ] +1  approve
> [ ] +0  no opinion
> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>
> This vote will go on for 5 days.
>
> [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html

[dsetrakyan]

Cos, I see your point, but I think this one falls under procedural issue,
no?

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]> wrote:

> What are we voting for this?
>
> Fortunately, Apache isn't about democracy. [1]
>
> [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> Cos
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:08PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > tool.
> >
> > [ ] +1  approve
> > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> >
> > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
>

[irudyak]

+1

On Nov 16, 2016 9:15 AM, "Denis Magda" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> —
> Denis
>
> > On Nov 16, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > tool.
> >
> > [ ] +1  approve
> > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> >
> > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
>
>

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Cos, I also thought this falls under a procedural vote when starting this.

6 days have passed, vote is closed.

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Igor Rudyak <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Nov 16, 2016 9:15 AM, "Denis Magda" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > —
> > Denis
> >
> > > On Nov 16, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > > tool.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > >
> > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> >
> >
>

[Konstantin Boudnik-2]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:57PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> Cos, I see your point, but I think this one falls under procedural issue,
> no?

Not really. We are talking about a use of a tool to improve the review
process. Dictating a tool would be a step to a wrong direction. It's like
imposing the use of IDEA and banishing all Eclipse users (although, I wouldn't
mind really ;)

Dictation of a development technology is where the rift happens, IMO. But when
we are on the same page as the result of the consensus, rather than a fiat -
that's a different story.

Cos

k On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> > What are we voting for this?
> >
> > Fortunately, Apache isn't about democracy. [1]
> >
> > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:08PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review
> > > tool.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > >
> > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> >

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Igniters,

As I understand nobody is forced to use this tool, right?

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:01 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:57PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > Cos, I see your point, but I think this one falls under procedural issue,
> > no?
>
> Not really. We are talking about a use of a tool to improve the review
> process. Dictating a tool would be a step to a wrong direction. It's like
> imposing the use of IDEA and banishing all Eclipse users (although, I
> wouldn't
> mind really ;)
>
> Dictation of a development technology is where the rift happens, IMO. But
> when
> we are on the same page as the result of the consensus, rather than a fiat
> -
> that's a different story.
>
> Cos
>
> k On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > What are we voting for this?
> > >
> > > Fortunately, Apache isn't about democracy. [1]
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > >
> > > Cos
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:08PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code
> review
> > > > tool.
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > >
> > > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > >
>

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Vladimir, right, see my reply to Sergi above.

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> As I understand nobody is forced to use this tool, right?
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:01 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:57PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > Cos, I see your point, but I think this one falls under procedural
> issue,
> > > no?
> >
> > Not really. We are talking about a use of a tool to improve the review
> > process. Dictating a tool would be a step to a wrong direction. It's like
> > imposing the use of IDEA and banishing all Eclipse users (although, I
> > wouldn't
> > mind really ;)
> >
> > Dictation of a development technology is where the rift happens, IMO. But
> > when
> > we are on the same page as the result of the consensus, rather than a
> fiat
> > -
> > that's a different story.
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > k On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > What are we voting for this?
> > > >
> > > > Fortunately, Apache isn't about democracy. [1]
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > > >
> > > > Cos
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:08PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> > > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1],
> > > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code
> > review
> > > > > tool.
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > > >
> > > > > This vote will go on for 5 days.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> > > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html
> > > >
> >
>