+1 for this.

It greatly improves the contributor's experience, especially for new and
non experienced contributors.

On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 1:51 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:

> Thanks for raising this Xuanwo,
>
> I dislike having to give Approval for the CI both from a contributor and a
> committer standpoint. Often I see people raising PRs that cause the CI to
> fail but not knowing yet because it hasn't run yet. Having direct feedback
> from the CI makes the PR cycle much faster. Also from a reviewer
> perspective, I like to know if the CI passes before reviewing and this also
> takes a bit of time. I don't think there is much risk since the Actions
> have limited permissions, and all the repositories are actively looked at.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko Driesprong
>
> Op wo 31 jan 2024 om 18:43 schreef Daniel Weeks <daniel.c.we...@gmail.com
> >:
>
>> I agree with this change.  The defaults are not very community friendly
>> and make contributing hard.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 6:01 AM Xuanwo <xua...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello, everyone
>>>
>>> I'm starting this thread to discuss the possibility of changing the CI
>>> settings for
>>> iceberg-rust to only require approval for new GitHub users. This will
>>> improve the
>>> experience for our contributors.
>>>
>>> We do not have self-hosted runners, so there is no attack surface from
>>> the actions
>>> side. Additionally, iceberg-rust does not involve many heavy load CI
>>> tasks. Enabling
>>> it for PRs by default does not add to the overall burden on ASF runners.
>>>
>>> I think this change could speed up our iteration process.
>>>
>>> **Footnotes**
>>>
>>> I started discussion on slack[1] without objection. So I opened a ticket
>>> at [2]. The
>>> INFRA team is interested in hearing our community's thoughts on this
>>> list. Feel
>>> free to leave your comments here.
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://apache-iceberg.slack.com/archives/C05HTENMJG4/p1706686077901739
>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-25444
>>>
>>> Xuanwo
>>>
>>

Reply via email to