+1 on using PR. We can use the @tags and the github notification page[Participating tag] to check the PRs that need our attention.
Also, IMHO feature branches from which the PRs are created should be in our personal fork rather than the main geode git repo. Because when we push a branch called feature/GEODE-xxxx into the main apache geode repo, the JIRA system links the ticket to that branch and every commit/merge operation on that branch is logged in the comment section of ticket. In my opinion, the JIRA tickets should have clean and concise history. It should not contain history / commits of branch that will be deleted eventually , or commits that will be eventually squashed to a single commit message before merging to the main develop. Regards Naba On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:39 PM Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:35 PM Mark Bretl <mbr...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I like the functionality we get with GitHub, including the Travis CI > > integration. > > > > Do we have a proposed workflow change for committers? > > > The proposed workflow change to committers is to use the same workflow as > contributors. The only difference is after sufficient review of the PR you > could commit it yourself. > > -Jake >
