+1 Thanks Uma for bring up this discussion. Personally I think this should be a convention instead of a rule.
---- On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 07:16:37 +0800 Ritesh Shukla wrote --- > +1 for this. > We can wait to gather a broader consensus for certain rare cases where we > add new APIs or public changes but if the reviewer's original review > comments were addressed then it should be ok to go ahead and merge post a > timeout value. > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 2:51 PM Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla < > umamah...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Dear Ozone Devs, > > > > This has been brought up by Ritesh in community sync. I thought we could > > discuss this more broadly and set up some path forwarding options. > > > > With my past experience, when a reviewer does not respond for a long time > > and if another reviewer helped to review, we will just give a few days' > > wait for the old reviewer to confirm his comments. If no further responses > > from the old reviewer, we used to move ahead. > > > > I think we can follow the similar approach: > > > > When the reviewer does not respond for a long time (say 15days? ): > > The Author can freely ping other reviewers to help if no one else > > reviewed it yet. > > If the other reviewer is a committer and got +1 from him, then we can > > give a 3-7days time window for the old reviewer to check as a final > > friendly reminder. If still no responses, then we can just move ahead for > > commit based new committer reviewer's +1. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Regards, > > Uma > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ozone.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ozone.apache.org
