Hi Joe, thank you for starting this discussion. Having a common agreement on what to expect from a PR for it to be merged is very much a worthwhile goal.
I'm slightly worried about the addition to the PR template. We shouldn't make opening PRs even more difficult (unless it adds sufficient benefit). There are two main benefits to have from using templates: requiring information from authors to automate certain feedback, and serving as a self-control checklist for contributors. As it stands, a large number of PRs don't fill out the template, and I haven't yet seen anyone not merge a PR over that, so de-facto we are not using it for the former. For the latter purpose of contributors having a checklist for themselves, I think the current template is too long already and contains the wrong content. Being short here is key if we want anyone to read it, and personally I would cut it down significantly to a description and a couple of checkboxes. This isn't exactly the scope of your proposal, but personally I wouldn't like to add even more questions that need to be filled out, especially since they don't actually need to be filled out. It just creates an annoying burden for contributors and is ignored by those who might benefit most from reading it anyway. Ingo On Mon, Nov 15, 2021, 22:36 Johannes Moser <j...@ververica.com> wrote: > Dear Flink Community, > > We as the release managers of the 1.15 release are suggesting to introduce > a “Definition of Done". > > Let me elaborate a bit on the reasons: > * During the release process for 1.14 the stability of master was > sometimes in a state that made contributing to Apache Flink a bad > experience. > * Some of the changes that have been contributed seem to be unusable by > users because of defects. > * Documentation is neglected which also leads to users unable to make use > of changes. One of the reasons is, because documentation is often pushed to > a later state. > > With this definition of done awareness and sensibility for these aspect > should be increased. Both, for the ones who are committing and for the ones > that are reviewing. > We focus on code quality, testing and documentation. A shared > understanding is created. > > The Definition of Done as suggested: > > - > A PR is done and can be merged, when: > > 1. It is following the code contribution process > 2. It is implemented according to the code style and quality guide. > 3. If it has user facing changes the documentation has been updated > according to the documentation style guide. > 4. It is covered by tests. > 5. All tests passed. > - > > There are two PRs to illustrate the changes. > https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pull/481 < > https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pull/481> > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/17801 < > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/17801> > > > It isn’t the goal to make it harder to get changes into Apache Flink. It > is rather the opposite of making contributing and using Apache Flink a > better experience. > By creating awareness a push towards quality and usability should happen. > > I’m happy to hear your feedback. > > Best, > Joe
