I'll reach out to the Kafka community and ask if it's ok for us to "steal" their process for this.
On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 at 11:36 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > @Matthias: Yes, this is the reason why I like the KIP process and why I > said "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.". > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 at 11:28 Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > >> 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 >> > >>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >
