Re: Shepherding new contributions

Hmm, if the Mesos PMCs understand how ASF work they will be very careful implementing it b4 next board report. - Henry On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Joshua Cohen wrote: > They haven't actually implemented it yet. Here's the discussion thread: > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mesos-

Re: Shepherding new contributions

They haven't actually implemented it yet. Here's the discussion thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mesos-dev/201502.mbox/%3CCA%2B8RcoReugMVqoOpsnB8WGYBELa5fHwPA%3DJ%3DYHJE22iwZvsbeQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E (note the last message in the thread asking how it interacts with the Apache by-la

Re: Shepherding new contributions

Do you know how MAINTAINERS file work for Mesos? Does it list different committers for each areas of Mesos? - Henry On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Joshua Cohen wrote: > We had to revert this change as it was causing rbt to set the TARGET_PEOPLE > as the reviewers on update. We could probably

Re: Shepherding new contributions

We had to revert this change as it was causing rbt to set the TARGET_PEOPLE as the reviewers on update. We could probably hack our local rbt script to add a --target-people option for new reviews (no -r flag passed?) if we wanted to go that route. Alternately we could follow in the footsteps of Mes

Re: Shepherding new contributions

I have set Joshua and Bill to be the defaults for now: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31496/ On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Henry Saputra wrote: > This would work. > Anyone assigned as reviewer in the RB need to either execute the > review or excuse themselves to make sure all "ship it" votes a

Re: Shepherding new contributions

This would work. Anyone assigned as reviewer in the RB need to either execute the review or excuse themselves to make sure all "ship it" votes are accounted for. - Henry On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Joshua Cohen wrote: > I'm ok with that, as I think it's a better experience for new contribu

Re: Shepherding new contributions

I'm ok with that, as I think it's a better experience for new contributors than the current situation. However, my understanding is that we generally have a policy that you need a ship it from everyone on the People line of a review. If that's the case than the default people need to be cognizant o

Re: Shepherding new contributions

Looking at the reviewboard documentation it seems we can set the TARGET_PEOPLE field in .reviewboardrc to ensure the people line is auto-populated for each review. I think populating it initially

Re: Shepherding new contributions

Thanks for that background, Henry! That is actually useful for other unrelated thoughts I have had. We will make sure to keep this in mind. On Monday, February 23, 2015, Henry Saputra wrote: > Ok, we need to be careful about this maintainers/owners or shepherds > business. > > Apache Spark got

Re: Shepherding new contributions

Ok, we need to be careful about this maintainers/owners or shepherds business. Apache Spark got into some trouble from board when introducing this concept. First of all, in the eyes of ASF, all (P)PMCs have equal rights and responsibilities. Meaning, no concept of owners or maintainers for partic

Re: Shepherding new contributions

+1 to the idea. A first step in the right direction might be to do something you (unintentionally?) implied - default People. We could do this in .reviewboardrc [1], and let the people in there serve as dispatchers to find the right reviewers. I'm happy to volunteer to be in that list if that so

Re: Shepherding new contributions

I think establishing MAINTAINERS/OWNERS files is another valid way of doing this. On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Joshua Cohen wrote: > +1, I was thinking about this over the weekend. > > Mesos has recently been discussing adding MAINTAINERS files across the code > to document who should be in

Re: Shepherding new contributions

+1, I was thinking about this over the weekend. Mesos has recently been discussing adding MAINTAINERS files across the code to document who should be informed about changes within. I'm not sure Aurora is ready to go that far since generally it will either include all active committers or result in

Shepherding new contributions

Hey, With the increased interest in Aurora, the project has started to receive more contributions from non-committers. By default we do not populate the "People" line in the review, meaning there is no responsible person to ensure we accept or reject contributions. I think we should establish She