osdir.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] [Contributing] (2) - Review Steps


Still, even with a group of volunteers coordinating well, it is possible to
do better than we currently do, which is the goal.
No hard guarantees, agreed, but reasonable estimates and rules-of-thumbs
can work well...

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 5:21 PM Chesnay Schepler <chesnay@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> There is no guarantee that a PR will be looked at nor is it possible to
> provide this in any way on the project level.
>
> As far as Apache is concerned all contributors/committers etc. work
> voluntarily, and
> as such assigning work (which includes ownership if it implies such) or
> similar is simply not feasible.
>
> On 25.09.2018 16:54, Thomas Weise wrote:
> > I think that all discussion/coordination related to a contribution / PR
> > should be handled through the official project channel.
> >
> > I would also prefer that there are no designated "owners" and "experts",
> > for the reasons Fabian mentioned.
> >
> > Ideally there is no need to have "suggested reviewers" either, but then
> > what will be the process to ensure that PRs will be looked at?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:17 AM Tzu-Li Chen <wander4096@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Fabian,
> >>
> >> You convinced me. I miss the advantage we can take from mailing lists.
> >>
> >> Now I am of the same opinion.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> tison.
> >>
> >>
> >> Fabian Hueske <fhueske@xxxxxxxxx> 于2018年9月25日周二 下午3:01写道:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think questions about Flink should be posted on the public mailing
> >> lists
> >>> instead of asking just a single expert.
> >>>
> >>> There's many reasons for that:
> >>> * usually more than one person can answer the question (what if the
> >> expert
> >>> is not available?)
> >>> * non-committers can join the discussion and contribute to the
> community
> >>> (how can they become experts otherwise?)
> >>> * the knowledge is shared on the mailing list (helps in cases when only
> >> one
> >>> person can answer the question)
> >>>
> >>> Last but not least, my concern is that committers for popular
> >> contribution
> >>> areas would be flooded with requests.
> >>> Even without being listed as a "component expert", I cannot handle all
> >>> review requests directed at me.
> >>> I work on issues (PR reviews, my contributions, discussions) that I
> deem
> >>> important and being constantly pinged does not really help to speed
> >> things
> >>> up.
> >>> There are of course cases when it is important to be notified, but IMO
> >>> chances that those get the right attention decrease with the number of
> >>> requests.
> >>>
> >>> Best, Fabian
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 04:10 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <
> >>> wander4096@xxxxxxxxx
> >>>> :
> >>>> Thanks for start the discussion Stephan!
> >>>>
> >>>> (1) Do we agree on the five basic steps below?*
> >>>> +1 to the five steps and making the third question in the proposal the
> >>>> first.
> >>>>
> >>>> (2) How do we understand that consensus is reached about adding the
> >>>> feature?
> >>>> +1 to lazy consensus with one committer's +1
> >>>>
> >>>> (3) To answer the question whether a PR needs special attention
> >>>>
> >>>> Contributor can ask for special attention, which is treated as a
> >>>> suggestion.
> >>>> Committer can ask for another committers' attention, either for advice
> >> or
> >>>> transfer
> >>>> the right of decision.
> >>>>
> >>>> IMO it is quite help to add a page about "component experts", attach
> or
> >>>> link  it
> >>>> from README. This would be a really helpful information to new
> >>> contributors
> >>>> so that they know to whom he can cc or ask for advice. Besides it
> would
> >>>> be helpful for those who want to know more about the mechanism
> >> underneath
> >>>> Flink, now they know with whom they can consult.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> tison.
> >>>>
>
>