Yes, that page is crystal clear that we are using PR only :)
Jiangjie (Becket) Qin
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> The sentence is good, but I think we route new developers to here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes
>
> Can you
The sentence is good, but I think we route new developers to here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes
Can you check if this page makes it clear that we take PRs and PRs only?
Gwen
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Jiangjie Qin
wrote:
> Hi Gwen,
>
> I jus
Hi Gwen,
I just added one sentence saying we would prefer PR for new patches. Let me
know if you think it is too verbose.
Thanks,
Jiangjie (Becket) Qin
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> Completely agree! Thank you for reviewing and improving.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 201
Completely agree! Thank you for reviewing and improving.
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Ismael Juma wrote:
> Hi Gwen,
>
> I moved some text from
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Patch+submission+and+review
> to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Patch+Rev
Hi Gwen,
I moved some text from
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Patch+submission+and+review
to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Patch+Review+Tool and
made a few other minor tweaks. I think it's even clearer this way. Please
let me know if you disagree.
Thanks,
I
Thanks for making it clearer Gwen. One less item on my to-do list. :) More
below.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> There's always a plan!
>
> The contributor page only lists github as a valid contribution method.
>
> Theoretically the committers / reviewers should start ask
Sorry, I didn't understand your point.
You can definitely say for new patches to use the PR process. I believe the
wiki already says that, but if I'm missing anything, please fix it.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Jiangjie Qin
wrote:
> Yeah, sounds good! Maybe we can say that for new patches r
Yeah, sounds good! Maybe we can say that for new patches reviews, please
use PR process in the contributing wiki as well? Or it is somewhere I
missed it.
Jiangjie (Becket) Qin
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> There's always a plan!
>
> The contributor page only lists gi
There's always a plan!
The contributor page only lists github as a valid contribution method.
Theoretically the committers / reviewers should start asking contributors
who upload patches to send PRs instead and point them at the contributors
page (
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFK
Thanks Gwen, it is much cleaner now :)
Just wondering do we have any plan of deprecating the patch review tool?
Jiangjie (Becket) Qin
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> Just FYI:
>
> I heavily refactored the Patch Review wiki page (
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/displ
Just FYI:
I heavily refactored the Patch Review wiki page (
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Patch+Review+Tool).
I removed everything that duplicated (or contradicted) the contributor page
(https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes),
so there is
11 matches
Mail list logo
