Another team at the foundation has published a list of code repositories they manage and/or monitor, along with norms for reviewing code[1]. Should Discovery create something similar?
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Language_engineering/Code_review_st...
Kevin Smith Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
Hi!
Another team at the foundation has published a list of code repositories they manage and/or monitor, along with norms for reviewing code[1]. Should Discovery create something similar?
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Language_engineering/Code_review_st...
We don't get that many third-part patches I think, and this seems to be oriented to third-party? Unless we want to make something for intra-team patches too...
Adam pointed out that Reading has something similar: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Component_responsibility
It includes service level agreements for code review, but even without that it seems like a nice inventory of components/projects that they consider to be within their scope.
Kevin Smith Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Kevin Smith ksmith@wikimedia.org wrote:
Another team at the foundation has published a list of code repositories they manage and/or monitor, along with norms for reviewing code[1]. Should Discovery create something similar?
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Language_engineering/Code_review_st...
Kevin Smith Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
The Owners[1] tool in phabricator is a good way to take inventory of the code owned by each team or individual. I encourage everyone to create packages for the repos you care about (or even subdirectories within said repos, since packages can be scoped to sub-directory trees)
Packages are used for code auditing purposes (that is, post-commit review when a change bypasses pre-commit review) and also can be referenced in custom herald rules which notify you about specific changes.
[1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/owners/
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Kevin Smith ksmith@wikimedia.org wrote:
Adam pointed out that Reading has something similar: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Component_responsibility
It includes service level agreements for code review, but even without that it seems like a nice inventory of components/projects that they consider to be within their scope.
Kevin Smith Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Kevin Smith ksmith@wikimedia.org wrote:
Another team at the foundation has published a list of code repositories they manage and/or monitor, along with norms for reviewing code[1]. Should Discovery create something similar?
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Language_engineering/Code_review_st...
Kevin Smith Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
discovery mailing list discovery@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
Hi!
The Owners[1] tool in phabricator is a good way to take inventory of the code owned by each team or individual. I encourage everyone to create packages for the repos you care about (or even subdirectories within said repos, since packages can be scoped to sub-directory trees)
Packages are used for code auditing purposes (that is, post-commit review when a change bypasses pre-commit review) and also can be referenced in custom herald rules which notify you about specific changes.
Thanks, this is very interesting, I'll try to create a couple of packages and see how it goes.
I must note though that "Edit paths" interface is very hard to use - having one scroll box without search to locate a repo. I filed T140713 for it.
Thanks,
As a reminder to myself, or to whoever might create a page listing the repositories that Discovery maintains: Also add a link to that page from https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115854
Kevin Smith Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi!
The Owners[1] tool in phabricator is a good way to take inventory of the code owned by each team or individual. I encourage everyone to create packages for the repos you care about (or even subdirectories within said repos, since packages can be scoped to sub-directory trees)
Packages are used for code auditing purposes (that is, post-commit review when a change bypasses pre-commit review) and also can be referenced in custom herald rules which notify you about specific
changes.
Thanks, this is very interesting, I'll try to create a couple of packages and see how it goes.
I must note though that "Edit paths" interface is very hard to use - having one scroll box without search to locate a repo. I filed T140713 for it.
Thanks,
Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org
discovery mailing list discovery@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
Hi!
As a reminder to myself, or to whoever might create a page listing the repositories that Discovery maintains: Also add a link to that page from https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115854
I've started the inventory at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery#Code
It is missing a lot of stuff now (e.g. all dashboards repos not there because I don't know which is which :), and maps/interactive stuff not there too) so everybody that can add to it please feel welcome. Ideally it also needs some explanations about which code does what :)
<quote name="Stas Malyshev" date="2016-08-12" time="12:19:12 -0700">
Hi!
As a reminder to myself, or to whoever might create a page listing the repositories that Discovery maintains: Also add a link to that page from https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115854
I've started the inventory at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery#Code
It is missing a lot of stuff now (e.g. all dashboards repos not there because I don't know which is which :), and maps/interactive stuff not there too) so everybody that can add to it please feel welcome. Ideally it also needs some explanations about which code does what :)
Sorry to barge in on your team list, but I had a question/request:
Have you seen the Reading team's list on https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Component_responsibility ?
The parts that I really like about it are the last two columns: "Actively developed/integrated?" and "First code review SLA+".
I'd encourage you (the royal 'you', the Discovery Team) to think about that as well as you do this.
Last, a programming note: I plan to consolidate all of these on the [[mw:Developers/Maintainers]] page at some point in the not terribly distant future (like, in a week or so). I plan to add a "Relevant WMF Team" (or such) column there to fill in to not step over the other maintainers in the list. And, try to make it sortable as well.
The point of that is to keep this information centralized. I'm happy it's happening ad-hoc in a distributed way right now, but that doesn't scale for the "this thing is broken, who do I ask about it" use case (iow: my main one).
Ok, back to your regularly scheduled programming,
Greg
Thanks Greg. I added an "Active?" column, aspirationally. Hopefully it will be easy for someone to add "Yes" or "No" for each row.
I don't think we're in a position to post an SLA yet, so I'm not willing to be that aspirational on behalf of others.
Kevin Smith Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Greg Grossmeier greg@wikimedia.org wrote:
<quote name="Stas Malyshev" date="2016-08-12" time="12:19:12 -0700"> > Hi! > > > As a reminder to myself, or to whoever might create a page listing the > > repositories that Discovery maintains: Also add a link to that page from > > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115854 > > I've started the inventory at > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery#Code > > It is missing a lot of stuff now (e.g. all dashboards repos not there > because I don't know which is which :), and maps/interactive stuff not > there too) so everybody that can add to it please feel welcome. Ideally > it also needs some explanations about which code does what :)
Sorry to barge in on your team list, but I had a question/request:
Have you seen the Reading team's list on https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Component_responsibility ?
The parts that I really like about it are the last two columns: "Actively developed/integrated?" and "First code review SLA+".
I'd encourage you (the royal 'you', the Discovery Team) to think about that as well as you do this.
Last, a programming note: I plan to consolidate all of these on the [[mw:Developers/Maintainers]] page at some point in the not terribly distant future (like, in a week or so). I plan to add a "Relevant WMF Team" (or such) column there to fill in to not step over the other maintainers in the list. And, try to make it sortable as well.
The point of that is to keep this information centralized. I'm happy it's happening ad-hoc in a distributed way right now, but that doesn't scale for the "this thing is broken, who do I ask about it" use case (iow: my main one).
Ok, back to your regularly scheduled programming,
Greg
-- | Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
discovery mailing list discovery@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery