Hi David, Thanks for this initiative. It looks really helpful and please count me in.
Regards, Ammu Parvathy On 2024/11/07 10:35:43 Hong Liang wrote: > Hi David, > > Thanks for this proposal. I agree that this is something we can strive to > do better in the Flink community, and I would be keen to help out here. > > +1 to the suggestion for a recurring working group meeting to triage and > assign PRs. > > I think the suggestions we have on the thread are great, but can be > explored independently! > 1. Review open PRs. We could simply get started by sorting by updated date > in descending order (LIFO ensures we are looking at the freshest ones), or > choosing a particular component > https://github.com/apache/flink/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc > 2. Bot to followup on stale PRs, and close them if not needed. > > Side note: Also did some analysis of the PRs by labels, and attached the > data below. I imagine we could close out the Documentation ones quite > quickly! > > Regards, > Hong > > Open PRs as of (2024-11-07) by label. > > review=description? : 275 > component=TableSQL/Planner : 138 > component=TableSQL/API : 109 > component=Documentation : 90 > component=<none> : 70 > component=Runtime/StateBackends : 54 > component=Runtime/Coordination : 44 > component=chinese-translation : 41 > component=TableSQL/Runtime : 39 > component=Formats : 37 > component=Connectors/Hive : 36 > component=API/DataStream : 32 > component=Runtime/Checkpointing : 32 > component=Tests : 29 > component=Deployment/Kubernetes : 25 > component=Connectors/FileSystem : 24 > component=Connectors/Common : 21 > component=API/Core : 20 > component=Runtime/WebFrontend : 20 > component=TableSQL/Ecosystem : 19 > component=Runtime/Task : 17 > dependencies : 16 > component=API/Python : 15 > component=FileSystems : 15 > component=TableSQL/Client : 15 > component=Runtime/REST : 14 > component=Deployment/YARN : 13 > component=Runtime/Metrics : 13 > component=BuildSystem/CI : 12 > component=API/TypeSerializationSystem : 11 > component=Client/JobSubmission : 11 > component=Runtime/Configuration : 11 > component=BuildSystem : 9 > component=Library/CEP : 8 > java : 8 > javascript : 8 > component=CommandLineClient : 7 > component=Connectors/HBase : 6 > component=Runtime/Network : 6 > component=Connectors/Kafka : 5 > component=Connectors/Kinesis : 5 > component=TestInfrastructure : 5 > component=Connectors/HadoopCompatibility : 4 > component=Deployment/Scripts : 4 > component=API/DataSet : 3 > component=Connectors/Cassandra : 3 > component=TableSQL/LegacyPlanner : 3 > review=consensus? : 3 > component=Connectors/GoogleCloudPubSub : 2 > component=Connectors/Pulsar : 2 > component=Examples : 2 > component=API/Scala : 1 > component=BuildSystem/AzurePipelines : 1 > component=BuildSystem/Shaded : 1 > component=Documentation/Training : 1 > component=flink-docker : 1 > component=ProjectWebsite : 1 > component=Runtime/QueryableState : 1 > post-ui-rework : 1 > > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 5:06 AM Lyrics Cool <kt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello David, > > > > I believe this is a valuable initiative that will significantly enhance the > > codebase as well. I would also like to join this group and contribute to > > the community. > > > > Regards, > > Anu K T > > > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 8:36 PM David Radley <da...@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%20%3D%20FLINK%20AND%20priority%20in%20(Blocker%2C%20Critical) > > > 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 > > > > > >
