Matteo,
thank you for your clarification
I agree that having 3 +1 from PMC members is good for a PIP
I am +1 in the current form of this proposal.
Enrico
Il giorno gio 19 ago 2021 alle ore 21:35 Matteo Merli
ha scritto:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:49 AM Enrico Olivelli
> wrote:
> > I agre
> Thanks for working on this. I've been wondering about this for a while now.
>
> Is the expectation that a PR with proposed changes must already be created
> before a PIP is added to the Wiki? I've felt a little confused about this
> in the past when trying to start discussions or get feedback on
Matteo,
Thanks for working on this. I've been wondering about this for a while now.
Is the expectation that a PR with proposed changes must already be created
before a PIP is added to the Wiki? I've felt a little confused about this
in the past when trying to start discussions or get feedback on
+1, This proposal looks good to me!
Thanks,
Hang
Matteo Merli 于2021年8月20日周五 上午3:50写道：
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:29 AM Ivan Kelly wrote:
> >
> > > My two cents as a mere contributor who once wrote a PIP. I would love
> to
> > > see PIPs as a versioned document in git instead of the Wiki. This
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:29 AM Ivan Kelly wrote:
>
> > My two cents as a mere contributor who once wrote a PIP. I would love to
> > see PIPs as a versioned document in git instead of the Wiki. This would
> > provide history and context, make it easy to comment and propose fixes and
> > enhancemen
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:49 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> I agree that the CLI is really an API, but sometimes we add options in a
> very straightforward way,
> I am not sure we must require a PIP for every option, especially if we are
> simply exposition some Pulsar Client feature that is not ava
> My two cents as a mere contributor who once wrote a PIP. I would love to
> see PIPs as a versioned document in git instead of the Wiki. This would
> provide history and context, make it easy to comment and propose fixes and
> enhancements which is currently not possible with the Wiki. The PMC wou
Hi,
My two cents as a mere contributor who once wrote a PIP. I would love to
see PIPs as a versioned document in git instead of the Wiki. This would
provide history and context, make it easy to comment and propose fixes and
enhancements which is currently not possible with the Wiki. The PMC would
+1,lgtm
Best Regards.
Jia Zhai
Beijing, China
Mobile: +86 15810491983
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 4:20 PM PengHui Li wrote:
> +1, the proposal looks good to me!
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 3:49 PM Enrico Olivelli
> wrote:
>
> > Matteo,
> > Overall the proposal looks go
+1, the proposal looks good to me!
Thanks,
Penghui
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 3:49 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> Matteo,
> Overall the proposal looks good to me.
> I have a couple of points, about the 'VOTE' and about what is subject to a
> PIP or not.
> I will add my comments inline below
>
> Shall
Matteo,
Overall the proposal looks good to me.
I have a couple of points, about the 'VOTE' and about what is subject to a
PIP or not.
I will add my comments inline below
Shall we need a "meta PIP" for this PIP ? Just joking, this discussion is
probably enough.
Thank you very much, we really neede
+1 for standardizing the PIP workflow!
The proposal looks good!
- Sijie
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:46 PM Matteo Merli wrote:
> This is a proposal that I promised to send out for a long time.
> It should be considered as a draft and I'd love to hear feedback on this.
>
> The motivations to impr
This is a proposal that I promised to send out for a long time.
It should be considered as a draft and I'd love to hear feedback on this.
The motivations to improve the current PIP process are:
* When PIPs were introduced, the process was intentionally left as very
lightweight and not very str
13 matches
Mail list logo
