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 <fhue...@gmail.com >: > 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 < > aljos...@apache.org>: > >> +1 >> >> > On 9. Oct 2018, at 17:11, Hequn Cheng <chenghe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > +1 >> > >> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 3:25 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > >> >> +1 >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) >> >> <wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com.invalid> wrote: >> >> >> >>> +1 >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>> 发件人：vino yang <yanghua1...@gmail.com> >> >>> 发送时间：2018年10月9日(星期二) 14:08 >> >>> 收件人：dev <dev@flink.apache.org> >> >>> 主 题：Re: [DISCUSS] [Contributing] (2) - Review Steps >> >>> >> >>> +1 >> >>> >> >>> Peter Huang <huangzhenqiu0...@gmail.com> 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 <t...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> +1 >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:36 PM Tzu-Li Chen <wander4...@gmail.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> +1 >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Jin Sun <isun...@gmail.com> 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 <fhue...@gmail.com> >> >>>>> 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 < >> >>>>>>> wander4...@gmail.com >> >>>>>>>>> : >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> 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 <ches...@apache.org> 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 < >> >>>> wander4...@gmail.com >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 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 <fhue...@gmail.com> 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 < >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wander4...@gmail.com >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> : >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
