Hi Tom,
Welcome 😊
Does anyone in the community know if we have considered running bots as Tom
suggests,
Kind regards, David.
From: Tom Cooper <c...@tomcooper.dev>
Date: Wednesday, 6 November 2024 at 15:34
To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Flink technical debt.
Hey David,
As a newcomer to the community myself, the number of open PRs and JIRA issues
is a bit daunting. So thanks for starting this initiative.
I like the idea of tackling the mountain by triaging the PRs / JIRA Issues and
I would be very happy to join the effort. However, I wonder if it would be
better to start with one of the various GitHub bots / JIRA scripts that will
auto-comment on an "old" PR / Issue asking if it is still valid, giving the
author chance to say it is still relevant, and then close it if there is no
activity. Of course we will need to decide what constitutes "old" (e.g. no
activity for a year) and set timeouts for responding.
This will probably clear a large number of stale PRs and issues quickly and
shrink the size of the pile that needs to be triaged.
Cheers,
Tom Cooper
On Monday, 4 November 2024 at 15:05, David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
> I have been looking at the Flink Jira and git. I see a large number of Flink
> Jira issues that are open and critical or blockers
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-36655?jql=project %3D FLINK AND
> priority in (Blocker%2C Critical)
> I realise some of these issues may not actually be critical as they have been
> labelled by the submitter.
>
> I see 1239 open unmerged PRs
> https://github.com/apache/flink/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen. Some of these are
> not associated with assigned issues, so may never be merged. This amount of
> unmerged PRs, means that many people have put a lot of time and effort into
> creating code that has not made it into the codebase, so they do not get the
> credit for the contribution, which must be disheartening and the codebase
> does not get the benefit of the contribution.
>
> This is a large amount of technical debt. I would like to help address this
> problem by setting up a workgroup, with others in the community who would
> like this addressed. The scope of the workgroup would be to improve these
> numbers by activities such as:
>
> * Triaging PRs so it is easier for committers to merge or close them.
> * Identifying prs that could be closed out as no longer relevant.
> * Getting committer buy in.
>
> Are there other ideas from the community around how this could be improved
> with or without a workgroup, or whether the existing processes should be
> sufficient or enhanced?
>
> Is there an appetite to address this in the community? I am happy to drive
> this as a community workgroup, with my team in IBM, if there is community
> support.
>
> We could call the community workgroup ?Community Health Initiative? CHI to
> energise the Flink community.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Kind regards, David.
>
> Unless otherwise stated above:
>
> IBM United Kingdom Limited
> Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
> Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road,
> Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN
Unless otherwise stated above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited
Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road,
Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN
