I also like the proposal. I think its an issue that Google Docs comments are not reflected within ASF infra. Therefore, I'm +1 on discussing the proposals on the mailing list.
I agree that we need to clean up our wiki. On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > Just to point out one thing about Kafka KIPs and using the project wiki: > > The wiki contains the current state of the proposal, while the > discussion is covered over the dev-mailing list. IMHO, this makes a lot > of sense, as people tend to follow the mailing list but not wiki > changes. Furthermore, the mailing list tracks the whole discussion > history, while the proposal is kept in a clean state and thus easy to read. > > -Matthias > > > On 07/06/2016 10:09 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > > Jip, that's why I referenced the Kafka process which is also in their > wiki. > > > > On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 at 21:01 Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Yes, big +1 > >> > >> I had actually talked about the same thing with some people as well. > >> > >> I am currently sketching a few FLIPs for things, like improvements to > the > >> Yarn/Mesos/Kubernetes integration > >> > >> > >> One thing we should do here is to actually structure the wiki a bit to > make > >> it easier to find information and proposals. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >>> Hey Aljoscha, > >>> > >>> thanks for this proposal. I've somehow missed it last week. I like the > >>> idea very much and agree with your assessment about the problems with > >>> the Google Doc approach. > >>> > >>> Regarding the process: I'm also in favour of adopting it from Kafka. I > >>> would not expect any problems with this, but we can post a quick note > >>> to their ML. > >>> > >>> @Matthias: The name works for me. ;-) > >>> > >>> – Ufuk > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> > >>> wrote: > >>>> FLIP ?? Really? :D > >>>> > >>>> http://www.maya.tv/en/character/flip > >>>> > >>>> -Matthias > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 06/28/2016 06:26 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > >>>>> I'm proposing to add a formal process for how we deal with (major) > >>>>> improvements to Flink and design docs. This has been mentioned > several > >>>>> times recently but we never took any decisive action to actually > >>> implement > >>>>> such a process so here we go. > >>>>> > >>>>> Right now, we have Jira issues and we sometimes we have design docs > >>> that we > >>>>> keep in Google Docs. Jamie recently added links to those that he > could > >>> find > >>>>> on the mailing list to the Flink wiki: > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Home. > >>> The > >>>>> problem with these is that a) the comments on the Google Docs are not > >>>>> reflected in Jira and the mailing list. There has been some very > >> active > >>>>> discussion on some of the docs that most people would never notice. > >> The > >>>>> community therefore might seem less active than it actually is. b) > the > >>>>> documents are not very discoverable, if we had a clearly defined > place > >>>>> where we put them and also prominently link to this on the Flink > >>> homepage > >>>>> this would greatly help people that try to find out about current > >>>>> developments. > >>>>> > >>>>> Kafka has a process like this: > >>>>> > >>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Improvement+Proposals > >>> . > >>>>> They call it KIP, for Kafka Improvement Proposal. We could either > >> adapt > >>>>> this for Flink or come up with our own process. Doing the former > would > >>> save > >>>>> us a lot of time and I don't think the Kafka community would mind us > >>>>> copying their process. The subject also hints at this, our process > >>> could be > >>>>> called FLIP, for Flink Improvement Proposal. > >>>>> > >>>>> What do you think? Feedback is highly welcome. :-) > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> Aljoscha > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > >
