+1! I'll initiate a separate thread to discuss implementing a similar approach for iceberg-python and iceberg-go
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 7:02 PM Jack Ye <yezhao...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1! And I think we should also do that for iceberg-go > > -Jack > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2024, 5:42 PM Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +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 >>>>> >>>>
