+1

> I wonder if we can create issue in client repo automatically with bots for 
> PRs labelled"component/client" in pulsar repo.
> This would save the extra effort for the reviewer.

But there are many PRs with "component/client" label that are specific
to java client changes. I think these should not be added to other
clients' repos.



On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 4:18 PM Haiting Jiang <jianghait...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> +1. Great idea.
>
> I wonder if we can create issue in client repo automatically with bots for 
> PRs labelled"component/client" in pulsar repo.
> This would save the extra effort for the reviewer.
>
> Thanks,
> Haiting Jiang
>
> On 2022/01/12 03:45:18 "r...@apache.org" wrote:
> > Hello everyone:
> >
> > At present, all our PIP and related function changes are mainly in the Java
> > language, and all new functions will be merged into the Java SDK first, but
> > for SDKs in other languages, this is completely a black box, they don't
> > know what changes or optimizations have been made on the Java SDK side.
> >
> > The most typical problem is that when users of other languages encounter
> > various problems during use, when the maintainers of other languages want
> > to fix these problems, we do not know that the Java SDK side has made these
> > changes. Therefore, every current solution is to constantly check where the
> > gap of the current Java SDK is, which brings great challenges to the
> > maintainers themselves.
> >
> > So here is an idea, when the committters/PMC responsible for reviewing the
> > Java SDK can do more to help evaluate whether these PIPs or new changes
> > need to support this function in other languages, and then the
> > corresponding issue is created in the corresponding SDK, so that it is
> > convenient for the maintainers of other language SDKs to further evaluate
> > the priority of this function, and it can also attract more contributors
> > who are good at certain languages to claim the corresponding issue and
> > contribute the corresponding function.
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > Xiaolong Ran
> >



-- 
Zike Yang

Reply via email to