Thanks a lot for the proposal! +1 for doing it!
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 12:27 PM Khachatryan Roman < khachatryan.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Konstantin, > > I think we should try it out. > Even if tickets don't work well it can be a good step towards managing > technical debt in some other way, like wiki. > > Thanks! > > Regards, > Roman > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:32 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <dwysakow...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > I'd be fine with dropping the "Trivial" priority in favour of "starter" > > label. > > > > Best, > > > > Dawid > > > > On 01/03/2021 11:53, Konstantin Knauf wrote: > > > Hi Dawid, > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback. Do you think we should simply get rid of the > > > "Trivial" priority then and use the "starter" label more aggressively? > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Konstantin > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:44 AM Dawid Wysakowicz < > dwysakow...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Konstantin, > > >> > > >> I also like the idea. > > >> > > >> Two comments: > > >> > > >> * you describe the "Trivial" priority as one that needs to be > > >> implemented immediately. First of all it is not used to often, but I > > >> think the way it works now is similar with a "starter" label. Tasks > that > > >> are not bugs, are easy to implement and we think they are fine to be > > >> taken by newcomers. Therefore they do not fall in my mind into > > >> "immediately" category. > > >> > > >> * I would still deprioritise test instabilities. I think there > shouldn't > > >> be a problem with that. We do post links to all failures therefore it > > >> will automatically priortise the tasks according to failure > frequencies. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> > > >> Dawid > > >> > > >> On 01/03/2021 09:38, Konstantin Knauf wrote: > > >>> Hi Xintong, > > >>> > > >>> yes, such labels would make a lot of sense. I added a sentence to the > > >>> document. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> > > >>> Konstantin > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 8:51 AM Xintong Song <tonysong...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >>>> Thanks for driving this discussion, Konstantin. > > >>>> > > >>>> I like the idea of having a bot reminding reporter/assignee/watchers > > >> about > > >>>> inactive tickets and if needed downgrade/close them automatically. > > >>>> > > >>>> My two cents: > > >>>> We may have labels like "downgraded-by-bot" / "closed-by-bot", so > that > > >> it's > > >>>> easier to filter and review tickets updated by the bot. > > >>>> We may want to review such tickets (e.g., monthly) in case a valid > > >> ticket > > >>>> failed to draw the attention of relevant committers and the reporter > > >>>> doesn't know who to ping. > > >>>> > > >>>> Thank you~ > > >>>> > > >>>> Xintong Song > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 1:37 AM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org > > > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Thanks for starting this discussion Konstantin. I like your > proposal > > >> and > > >>>>> also the idea of automating the tedious parts of it via a bot. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>> Till > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 4:17 PM Konstantin Knauf < > kna...@apache.org> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Dear Flink Community, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I would like to start a discussion on improving and to some extent > > >>>> simply > > >>>>>> defining the way we work with Jira. Some aspects have been > > discussed a > > >>>>>> while back [1], but I would like to go a bit beyond that with the > > >>>>> following > > >>>>>> goals in mind: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> clearer communication and expectation management with the > > community > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> a user or contributor should be able to judge the urgency > of a > > >>>>> ticket > > >>>>>> by its priority > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> if a ticket is assigned to someone the expectation that > > someone > > >>>> is > > >>>>>> working on it should hold > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> generally reduce noise in Jira > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> reduce overhead of committers to ask about status updates of > > >>>>>> contributions or bug reports > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> “Are you still working on this?” > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> “Are you still interested in this?” > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> “Does this still happen on Flink 1.x?” > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> “Are you still experiencing this issue?” > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> “What is the status of the implementation”? > > >>>>>> - > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> while still encouraging users to add new tickets and to leave > > >>>> feedback > > >>>>>> about existing tickets > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Please see the full proposal here: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >> > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/19VmykDSn4BHgsCNTXtN89R7xea8e3cUIl-uivW8L6W8/edit# > > >>>>>> . > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The idea would be to discuss this proposal in this thread. If we > > come > > >>>> to > > >>>>> a > > >>>>>> conclusion, I'd document the proposal in the wiki [2] and we would > > >> then > > >>>>>> vote on it (approval by "Lazy Majority"). > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Konstantin > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rd34fb695d371c2bf0cbd1696ce190bac35dd78f29edd8c60d0c7ee71%40%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E > > >>>>>> [2] > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLINK+Jira+field+definitions > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Konstantin Knauf > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> https://twitter.com/snntrable > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> https://github.com/knaufk > > >>>>>> > > >> > > > > >
