Difference between revisions of "StarlingX/CodeSubmissionGuidelines"
Ghada.khalil (talk | contribs) |
Ghada.khalil (talk | contribs) (→StarlingX Code Submission Guidelines) |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
* '''Use Gerrit''' for StarlingX code reviews | * '''Use Gerrit''' for StarlingX code reviews | ||
** Follow the Openstack Git Commit Good Practice [[GitCommitMessages|here]] | ** Follow the Openstack Git Commit Good Practice [[GitCommitMessages|here]] | ||
− | * '''Add the core reviewers''' for the affected sub-project to the review | + | * '''Add the core reviewers''' for the affected sub-project to the review as well as any other interested reviewers |
** The core reviewers are listed on each sub-project wiki pages. The list of sub-projects is available [[StarlingX#StarlingX_Projects|here]] | ** The core reviewers are listed on each sub-project wiki pages. The list of sub-projects is available [[StarlingX#StarlingX_Projects|here]] | ||
** In order for code to get merged, two core reviewers must give the review +2. A final Workflow +1 from one core reviewer will allow the code to merge | ** In order for code to get merged, two core reviewers must give the review +2. A final Workflow +1 from one core reviewer will allow the code to merge |
Revision as of 22:09, 25 October 2018
StarlingX Code Submission Guidelines
- Use Gerrit for StarlingX code reviews
- Follow the Openstack Git Commit Good Practice here
- Add the core reviewers for the affected sub-project to the review as well as any other interested reviewers
- The core reviewers are listed on each sub-project wiki pages. The list of sub-projects is available here
- In order for code to get merged, two core reviewers must give the review +2. A final Workflow +1 from one core reviewer will allow the code to merge
- Authors should not +2 or W+ their own code submissions
- If an exception is needed (ex: emergency fix for a broken build), the author should send an email to the mailing list to let the community know.
- For more details on the code review process, refer to the Openstack Developer Guide
- Link your review to a StoryBoard Story or Launchpad Bug
- For traceability, always link your code change to a story or bug. The story/bug will give reviewers context for the code changes.
- Gerrit will update the status of the story/bug automatically once the code is merged.
- Linking to StoryBoard Stories: Specify the story and task ID in the commit message as follows:
- Story: $story_id
- Task: $task_id
- Example: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/590083/
- Linking to Launchpad Bugs: Specify the Bug ID in the commit message as follows:
- Closes-Bug: $bug_id -- use 'Closes-Bug' if the commit is intended to fully fix and close the bug being referenced.
- Partial-Bug: $bug_id -- use 'Partial-Bug' if the commit is only a partial fix and more work is needed.
- Related-Bug: $bug_id -- use 'Related-Bug' if the commit is merely related to the referenced bug.
- If a fix requires multiple commits, use "Partial-Bug" with only the final commit using "Closes-Bug"
- Example: https://review.openstack.org/596305
- Pre-Review / Pre-Submission Testing
- For the majority of cases, it is expected that the author completes their testing before posting a review.
- At a minimum, make sure the new code compiles and builds successfully.
- Run tox tests (flake8, py27, etc) successfully. These can all be run manually prior to launching a review.
- Update existing automated unit tests and add new ones when applicable.
- Verify basic functional testing on a live system to ensure the new code gets executed and functions correctly.
- If needed, consult with the core reviewers or send questions to the mailing list regarding required/recommended testing.
- It's customary for code reviewers to ask about testing details as part of the gerrit code inspection, so be prepared.
- Early Review / Feedback
- In specific cases, changes can be posted for early review prior to testing (ex: need early feedback on detailed design/coding approach)
- Such changes should be marked as WIP in the commit message and given a Workflow -1 immediately by the author
- The author should also include a comment in the review explaining the purpose of the review and why the testing is deferred.
- Reviewing code early and often helps catch design and coding errors sooner and shows us following the Four Opens.
- Cherry-picking
- All code changes must be pushed to master first and then cherry-picked to the appropriate release branch as needed
- Exception: Feature branches used during development
- Patch Rebase
- During patch re-base, there is a chance that patches can be applied by treating the patch line numbers as approximate, rather than a strict requirement, just so long as the before/after context seems to be correct. They require fuzzing during the patch apply, and an .orig files will be created as the consequence of applying patches that are not clean.
- In StarlingX, we will not accept fuzzing patches. All patches are required to be re-based cleanly so that no fuzzing and no .orig files are generated.