osdir.com


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

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


Hi,

I merged the PR.
The review process is documented at [1].

Best, Fabian

[1] https://flink.apache.org/reviewing-prs.html

Am Mi., 10. Okt. 2018 um 17:48 Uhr schrieb Fabian Hueske <fhueske@xxxxxxxxx
>:

> Hi all,
>
> I opened a PR [1] to add the PR review guide to the Flink website.
>
> Cheers, Fabian
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pull/126
>
> Am Mi., 10. Okt. 2018 um 17:27 Uhr schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <
> aljoscha@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> +1
>>
>> > On 9. Oct 2018, at 17:11, Hequn Cheng <chenghequn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 3:25 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrmann@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999)
>> >> <wangzhijiang999@xxxxxxxxxx.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> +1
>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> 发件人:vino yang <yanghua1127@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> 发送时间:2018年10月9日(星期二) 14:08
>> >>> 收件人:dev <dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> 主 题:Re: [DISCUSS] [Contributing] (2) - Review Steps
>> >>>
>> >>> +1
>> >>>
>> >>> Peter Huang <huangzhenqiu0825@xxxxxxxxx> 于2018年10月9日周二 下午1:54写道:
>> >>>
>> >>>> +1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:47 PM Thomas Weise <thw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> +1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:36 PM Tzu-Li Chen <wander4096@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Jin Sun <isunjin@xxxxxxxxx> 于2018年10月9日周二 上午2:10写道:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> +1, look forward to see the change.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2018, at 12:07 AM, Fabian Hueske <fhueske@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Since we have addressed all comments (please raise your voice
>> >> if
>> >>>>>> not!), I
>> >>>>>>>> would like to move forward and convert the proposal [1] into a
>> >>> page
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>> Flink's website [2].
>> >>>>>>>> I will create a pull request against the website repo [3].
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Once the page got merged, we can start posting the review form
>> >> on
>> >>>> new
>> >>>>>>> pull
>> >>>>>>>> requests.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Best, Fabian
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [1]
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yaX2b9LNh-6LxrAmE23U3D2cRbocGlGKCYnvJd9lVhk
>> >>>>>>>> [2] https://flink.apache.org
>> >>>>>>>> [3] https://github.com/apache/flink-web
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 17:56 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <
>> >>>>>>> wander4096@xxxxxxxxx
>> >>>>>>>>> :
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Chesnay that we don't guarantee (quick) review
>> >> of a
>> >>>> PR
>> >>>>> at
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> project level. As ASF statement[1]:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Please show some patience with the developers if your patch
>> >> is
>> >>>> not
>> >>>>>>>>> applied as fast as you'd like or a developer asks you to make
>> >>>>> changes
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> the patch. If you do not receive any feedback in a reasonable
>> >>>> amount
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> time (say a week or two), feel free to send a follow-up e-mail
>> >>> to
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> developer list. Open Source developers are all volunteers,
>> >> often
>> >>>>> doing
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> development in their spare time.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> However, an open source community shows its friendliness to
>> >>>>>>> contributors.
>> >>>>>>>>> Thus contributors believe their contribution would be take
>> >> care
>> >>>> of,
>> >>>>>>> even be
>> >>>>>>>>> rejected with a reason; project members are thought kind to
>> >>>> provide
>> >>>>>>> help to
>> >>>>>>>>> the process.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Just like this thread kicked off, it is glad to see that Flink
>> >>>>>> community
>> >>>>>>>>> try best to help its contributors and committers, then take
>> >>>>> advantage
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> "open source".
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Best,
>> >>>>>>>>> tison.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/contributors#patches
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Chesnay Schepler <chesnay@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2018年9月25日周二
>> >> 下午11:21写道:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> 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.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>