Hi all, +1 for shepherd I would like to add me to shepherd for FlinkML.
Regards, Chiwan Park > On Jun 3, 2016, at 3:29 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 for shepherd > > I would prefer using that term rather than maintainer. It is being used in > Incubator PMC to help them keeping healthy development in podlings. > > The term "maintainer" kind of being scrutinized in ASF communities, in > recent episodes happening in Spark community. > > - Henry > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I like the name "shepherd". It implies a non-authorative role, and implies >> guidance, which is very fitting. >> >> I also thing there is no problem with having a "component shepherd" and a >> "pull request shepherd". >> >> Stephan >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I think calling the role maintainer is not a good idea. >>> The Spark community had a maintainer process which they just voted to >>> remove. From my understanding, a maintainer in Spark had a more active >> role >>> than the role we are currently discussing. >>> >>> I would prefer to not call the role "maintainer" to make clear that the >>> responsibilities are different (less active) and mainly observing. >>> >>> 2016-06-01 13:14 GMT+02:00 Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org>: >>> >>>> Thanks! I like the idea of renaming it. I'm fine with shepherd and I >>>> also like Vasia's suggestion "champion". >>>> >>>> I would like to add "Distributed checkpoints" as a separate component >>>> to track development for check- and savepoints. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Btw, in Jira, if we clean up our components we can also set a >> component >>>>> Lead that would get notified of issues for that component. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 at 10:43 Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'd also go with maintainer. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 01.06.2016 10:32, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> I think maintainer is also fine if we clearly specify that they >> are >>>> not >>>>>>> meant as dictators or gatekeepers of the component that they are >>>>>>> responsible for. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Aljoscha >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 at 09:48 Vasiliki Kalavri < >>>> vasilikikala...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> we could go for something like "sponsor" or "champion" :) >>>>>>>> I'm fine with the proposal. Good to see more than 1 person for >> both >>>>>> Gelly >>>>>>>> and Table API. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> cheers, >>>>>>>> -V. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 1 June 2016 at 05:46, Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai <tzuli...@gmail.com >>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'd like to be added to the Streaming Connectors component >>> (already >>>>>>>> edited >>>>>>>>> Wiki) :) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ah, naming, one of the hardest problems in programming :P Some >>>>>> comments: >>>>>>>>> I agree with Robert that the name "maintainers" will be somewhat >>>>>>>> misleading >>>>>>>>> regarding the authoritative difference with committers / PMCs, >>>>>> especially >>>>>>>>> for future newcomers to the community who don't come across the >>>>>> original >>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Simone's suggestion of Overseer seems good. The name naturally >>>> matches >>>>>>>> its >>>>>>>>> role - >>>>>>>>> - A group of "Overseers" for components, who keeps an eye on >>> related >>>>>> mail >>>>>>>>> threads, known limitations and issues, JIRAs, open PRs, >> requested >>>>>>>> features, >>>>>>>>> and potential new overseers and committers, etc, for the >> component >>>>>>>>> (original >>>>>>>>> maintainer role). >>>>>>>>> - A "Shepherd" for individual PRs, assigned from the overseers >> of >>>> the >>>>>>>>> component with the aim to guide the submitting contributor. >>>> Overseers >>>>>>>>> typically pick up new PRs to shepherd themselves, or the leading >>>>>> overseer >>>>>>>>> allocates an overseer to shepherd a PR which hasn't been picked >> up >>>> yet >>>>>>>>> after >>>>>>>>> a certain period of time. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Or perhaps we can also simply go for "Shepherds" for components >>> and >>>>>>>>> "Assigned Shepherd" for individual PRs? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Structure-the-Flink-Open-Source-Development-tp11598p11932.html >>>>>>>>> Sent from the Apache Flink Mailing List archive. mailing list >>>> archive >>>>>> at >>>>>>>>> Nabble.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>
