Hi! Sometimes, a change is really desireable for Apache Arrow, but the original author has not responded to a ping, or made progress in a while. In that case, it would be good to set expectations for PR authors that their PR might be adopted, and set norms for credit attribution.
I wanted to start a conversation about this. The full conversation might be more appropriate for the sync call. I could only find one reference to PR adoption, and it was in the Reviewing Contributions section under Social Aspects: https://arrow.apache.org/docs/developers/reviewing.html#social-aspects > If the contribution is genuinely desirable and the contributor is not making any progress, it is also possible to take it up. Out of politeness, it is however better to ask the contributor first. and slightly related > If a PR is generally ready for merge apart from trivial or uncontroversial concerns, the reviewer may decide to push changes themselves to the PR instead of asking the contributor to make the changes. A new contributor might not look at this section of the documentation, because it is written for reviewers, not PR authors. Things to consider are: * Would it make sense to mention that a PR could be adopted, and the circumstances in which it might be adopted, in the Lifecycle of a PR: https://arrow.apache.org/docs/developers/guide/step_by_step/pr_lifecycle.html. * What is a decent standard for "waiting for response to ping" (1 week? 2? Context dependent?). * Are there community norms for credit attribution in the Squashed merge commit, if multiple authors worked on a PR over time? * What is the process if OP has not set "allow contributions to this PR" on GitHub or if the adopted is not an Arrow committer? Does someone fork their fork? ~* Anja
