Re: PR Review Request

2022-07-05 Thread Stamatis Zampetakis
I completely agree with Julian. The problem cannot be solved unless we start investing more time in the project in the ways he already described. What I outlined previously is an attempt to mitigate the current situation, not something that can solve the problem for good. Nevertheless, to push thi

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-23 Thread Julian Hyde
+1 to Stamatis’ idea. It won’t make things worse. :) But to repeat what I said earlier. We need existing committers to pull their weight. If necessary, committers need to talk to their managers and get time allocated to contribute to “housekeeping”. One important kind of housekeeping is product

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-23 Thread Ruben Q L
+1 on Stamatis' idea, I think it could help with the current situation of lack of reviewers. Best, Ruben On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 12:56 PM Charles Givre wrote: > Hello all, > FWIW, If a committer/reviewer shortage is the issue, I'd second Stamatis's > recommendation. > Best, > -- C > > > On Jun

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-23 Thread Charles Givre
Hello all, FWIW, If a committer/reviewer shortage is the issue, I'd second Stamatis's recommendation. Best, -- C > On Jun 23, 2022, at 7:02 AM, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote: > > Hi all, > > How about granting Calcite committership to people who are already ASF > committers (in other projects) an

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-23 Thread Stamatis Zampetakis
Hi all, How about granting Calcite committership to people who are already ASF committers (in other projects) and they have a proven record of working with Calcite? Usually the PMC invites people to become committers to the project after having a few successful code contributions in Calcite/Avati

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-22 Thread Jing Zhang
Hi everyone, This is an awesome discussion to improve collaborating between different projects. Thanks Julian, Jacques, Austin, Martijn, Timo's effort to make it happen. Best, Jing Zhang Martijn Visser 于2022年6月23日周四 01:43写道: > Hi Jacques, Julian, Austin and everyone else, > > Thank you very mu

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-22 Thread Martijn Visser
Hi Jacques, Julian, Austin and everyone else, Thank you very much for sharing all your experiences and providing really valuable input. I'll definitely relay this back to the original discussion thread in the Flink community. Part of bringing this information back to the Flink community is also be

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-22 Thread Timo Walther
Hi everyone, This is a really great discussion. Thanks for starting it Martijn and your input Jacques! I have been fighting against forking Calcite in Flink for years already. Even when merging forks of Flink that transitively forked Calcite, in the end we were able to resolve conflicts / con

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-21 Thread Charles Givre
As the PMC for Apache Drill, I'd echo everyone's comments here Don't fork. Don't do it. Apache Drill forked Calcite several years ago which Calcite was on version 1.20 or 1.21. While this meant that some bugs were easily fixed, what it also meant that as our fork diverged from "regular"

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-21 Thread Austin Bennett
Martijn: I'd interpret Julian's response as welcoming you to contribute to the Calcite :-) Sounds like there is concretely room for: * reviewing ( ex: test, comment in PR, but not actually merge -- might make it easier/quicker for the current committers to then allow them to address other/more th

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-21 Thread Julian Hyde
Please don’t fork Calcite. Calcite suffers from the tragedy of the commons. Unlike many open source data projects, there is no commercial project that directly maps to Calcite (even though Calcite is an essential part of many projects). As a result no engineers work full-time on Calcite. It ta

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-21 Thread Jacques Nadeau
Martijn, thanks for sharing that thread in the Flink community. I'm someone who has forked Calcite twice: once in Apache Drill and again in Dremio. In both cases, it was all about trading short term benefits against long term costs. In both cases, I think the net amount of work was probably 5x as

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-21 Thread Martijn Visser
Thanks Julian and Austin! Any reply to kick-off some sort of discussion is worthwhile :D I definitely know the feeling of having more PRs open then you would like, looking at https://github.com/apache/flink/pulls :) There have been discussions in the Flink community about forking Calcite [1]. My

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-20 Thread Austin Bennett
>From the peanut gallery :-) --> Wow; yes, lots of open PRs. https://github.com/apache/calcite/pulls How can individuals from the Flink [sub-]community, and/or more general calcite community help lighten this load? Is there much weight given to reviews from non-committers; how to increase the

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-20 Thread Julian Hyde
Martijn, Since you requested a reply, I am replying. To answer your question, I don’t know of a way to move this topic forward. We have more PRs than people to review them. Julian > On Jun 19, 2022, at 11:58 PM, Martijn Visser wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I just wanted to reach out to the C

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-19 Thread Martijn Visser
Hi everyone, I just wanted to reach out to the Calcite community once more on this topic since no reply was received. Would be great if someone could get back to us. Best regards, Martijn Op wo 8 jun. 2022 om 11:24 schreef Martijn Visser : > Hi everyone, > > I would like to follow-up on this e

Re: PR Review Request

2022-06-08 Thread Martijn Visser
Hi everyone, I would like to follow-up on this email that was sent by Jing. So far, no progress has been made, despite reaching out to the mailing list, the original Jira ticket and reaching out to people directly. Is there a way that we can move this PR/topic forward? For context, in Apache