Sounds good! @Fabian Hueske
Fabian Hueske 于2018年10月18日周四 下午4:24写道：
> Hi,
>
> I opened a PR to extend the PR description template [1].
>
> @jincheng sun , I'd suggest to start a separate
> discussion about a template for Jira ticket. Let's try to keep this thread
> focused on the tooling to sup
Hi,
I opened a PR to extend the PR description template [1].
@jincheng sun , I'd suggest to start a separate
discussion about a template for Jira ticket. Let's try to keep this thread
focused on the tooling to support the review process.
Thanks, Fabian
[1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/6
I like @Fabian Hueske 's proposal, currently design the
template is pretty good idea. Because the template is convenient for
contributors to follow the norms to community contributions. About
templates, I think we also need an JIRA description template,
In particular, in the case of current JIRA b
Hi,
I'm slightly prefer the bot option. The bot can post the review template
automatically. But I do agree that we can start with a low-tech solution
and add a bot later if find it helpful.
Best, Hequn
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:17 AM Jin Sun wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 7:51 PM Tzu
+1
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 7:51 PM Tzu-Li Chen wrote:
> Hi Fabian,
>
> +1 for your proposal.
>
> For the downside, I think after adding the review process template,
> the pull request template would be high level into 3 parts:
>
> 1. Greeting and community guiding.
> 2. User completed template.
Hi Fabian,
+1 for your proposal.
For the downside, I think after adding the review process template,
the pull request template would be high level into 3 parts:
1. Greeting and community guiding.
2. User completed template.
3. Reviewer complete template.
If we can visually separate them, i.e.,
+1,
Agree to use the PR template.
Fabian Hueske 于2018年10月17日周三 上午12:48写道：
> Hi everyone,
>
> Instead of manually adding the review progress template as a comment to
> every new PR, we could also append it to the PR description template.
> The benefits would be:
> + no need to add it manually si
Hi everyone,
Instead of manually adding the review progress template as a comment to
every new PR, we could also append it to the PR description template.
The benefits would be:
+ no need to add it manually since it is automatically added to each PR
+ the template is versioned in the Flink Git rep
Hi,
Coming back to the original topic of the thread: How to implement the
guided review process.
I am in favor of starting with a low-tech solution.
We design a review template with a checkbox for the five questions (see
[1]) and a link to the detailed description of the review process ([1] will
Hi,
About "valuable", I agree with @Aljoscha that there is no clear standard of
judgment about "valuable".
But I think the priority may be a more specific indicator, because the JIRA
issue also has a "Priority" attribute.
Maybe we can tag the PR, for example: use the "Label" function of github,
or
In Beam, we have a bot that regularly nags people about inactive PRs and also
closes them after long inactivity.
And we use the github feature for assigning reviewers in github.
Sometimes it is hard for people to judge how "valuable" a PR is. Maybe some
knowledgable people could mark PRs as val
Hi Jin Sun,
Earlier this year, I also had these questions when I started contributing
code to Flink. In fact, the timing of a PR being reviewed will be related
to the priority of the problem solved by the PR.
And when you indicate the module to which it belongs in the title of the
PR, like "[FLINK
As a new contributor I cared about how to make my contribution accepted by the
community, some questions:
1) When will it get reviewed? Is there a rule about review timeline?
2) There are long backlog of pull requests, What happened if a pull request
not get noticed, do we have some mechanism
13 matches
Mail list logo
