Thanks a lot for merging and publishing the new review guidelines Fabian! Cheers, Till
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 10:22 AM Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > >> >
