I’d suggest first, +1 on the PR to express your interests and support.

Then you could add reviewer directly on the PR.

But this is outside the scope of this thread.

________________________________
From: Belousov Maksim Eduardovich <m.belou...@tinkoff.ru>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 1:22:07 AM
To: dev@zeppelin.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Review process

We are speaking in this thread about two reviewers on big PR, but there are PRs 
without any reviewers =)

What contributor can do if his PR have not been reviewed for 4 week?
For example https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/2684

Thanks,

Maksim Belousov


-----Original Message-----
From: Jongyoul Lee [mailto:jongy...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 8:34 PM
To: dev <dev@zeppelin.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Review process

I agree with some large PR should be delayed a bit longer. What I meant is we 
don't have to wait for all kind of PRs.

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Felix Cheung <felixcheun...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> +1
> What would be the rough heuristic people will be comfortable with-
> what is small and what is big?
>
> _____________________________
> From: Anthony Corbacho <anthonycorba...@apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 3:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Review process
> To: <dev@zeppelin.apache.org>
>
>
> I think for large PR (new feature or big change) we should still keep
> more than one approval before merging it since this will require more 
> attension.
>
> But for bug fix i think one approval should be enough.
>
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 at 7:49 AM Jeff Zhang <zjf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Agree with @Felix, especially for the large PR and PR of new
> > features it is still necessary to have more than +1.
> >
> > I think committer have the ability to identity whether this PR is
> > complicated enough that needs another committer's review. As long we
> > as have consensus, we could commit some PR without delay and some PR
> > for
> more
> > reviews. So that we can balance the development speed and code quality.
> >
> >
> >
> > Miquel Angel Andreu Febrer
> > <miquelangeland...@gmail.com>于2017年12月19日周二
> > 上午2:07写道:
> >
> > > You can automate that process in jenkins and manage the delay time
> > > of merging a pull request
> > >
> > > El 18 dic. 2017 18:03, "Felix Cheung" <felixcheun...@hotmail.com>
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > I think it is still useful to have a time delay after one
> > > > approve
> since
> > > > often time there are very feedback and updates after one
> > > > committer
> > > approval.
> > > >
> > > > Also github has a tab for all PRs you are subscribed to, it
> > > > shouldn’t
> > be
> > > > very hard to review all the approved ones again.
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Jongyoul Lee <jongy...@gmail.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 8:04:51 AM
> > > > To: dev@zeppelin.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Review process
> > > >
> > > > Good for summary. But actually, no committer merges without
> > > > delay
> after
> > > > reviewing it. So I thought we should clarify it officially.
> > > >
> > > > Now, some committers, including me, will be able to merge some
> > > > PRs
> > > without
> > > > delay and burden.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 at 11:27 PM moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Current review process[1] does require either at least a +1
> > > > > from
> > > > committer
> > > > > or 24 hours for lazy consensus.
> > > > >
> > > > > Pullrequest can be open for 1 or 2 days for additional review,
> > > > > but
> i
> > > > think
> > > > > they're not hard requirements. (e.g. Hotfixes are already
> > > > > being
> > merged
> > > > > without waiting additional review)
> > > > >
> > > > > So, technically, current policy allows any committer can start
> > review,
> > > > mark
> > > > > +1 and merge immediately without any delay if necessary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > moon
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > > > http://zeppelin.apache.org/contribution/contributions.
> > > > html#the-review-process
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 2:13 AM Belousov Maksim Eduardovich <
> > > > > m.belou...@tinkoff.ru> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 for non-delay merging.
> > > > > > Our team have opened approved PR [1] for 5 days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I didn't find any pages with `consensus how to review and
> > > > > > merge contributions`.
> > > > > > It would be nice to write a check list for reviewer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The development of Zeppelin is very important for us and we
> > > > > > want
> to
> > > > > review
> > > > > > new commits.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/2697
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Maksim Belousov
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Jongyoul Lee [mailto:jongy...@gmail.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 12:12 PM
> > > > > > To: dev <dev@zeppelin.apache.org>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Review process
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for the replying it. I think so
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Miquel Angel Andreu Febrer
> > > > > > < miquelangeland...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree, ig is necessary to have no delay afternoon
> > > > > > > merging. I
> > > think
> > > > > > > it will help speed up processes and help contributors
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > El 18 dic. 2017 4:33, "Jongyoul Lee" <jongy...@gmail.com>
> > > escribió:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi committers,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I want to suggest one thing about our reviewing process.
> > > > > > > We
> have
> > > the
> > > > > > > policy to wait for one-day before merging some PRs. AFAIK,
> > > > > > > It's because we reduce mistakes and prevent abuses from
> > > > > > > committing
> by
> > > > owner
> > > > > > > without reviewing it concretely. I would like to change
> > > > > > > this
> > policy
> > > > to
> > > > > > > remove delay after merging it. We, recently, don't have
> > > > > > > much
> > > > reviewers
> > > > > > > and committers who can merge continuously, and in my case,
> > > > > > > I, sometimes, forget some PRs that I have to merge. And I
> > > > > > > also
> > believe
> > > > > > > all committers have consensus how to review and merge
> > > contributions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How do you think of it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > JL
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
> > > > > > > http://madeng.net
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
> > > > > > http://madeng.net
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
> > > > http://madeng.net
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>


--
이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
http://madeng.net

Reply via email to