Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

Branko, Personally, it's not clear to me why the decision on having RTC process for committers for most critical modules shows our immaturity in a sense of open source collaboration. As Raul properly noted below, the committers were always using RTC informally for most of the modules trying

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 05.03.2016 04:43, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > > It saddens me to see this coming to it ;( > > Yeah. You guys are introducing red tape that's a barrier for new > committers and a bureaucratic trap for everyone else. > >

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

On 05.03.2016 04:43, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > It saddens me to see this coming to it ;( Yeah. You guys are introducing red tape that's a barrier for new committers and a bureaucratic trap for everyone else. For example: what happens when a module owner takes off for a couple months? Which is

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

I recommend to add Andrey Novikov as Visor maintainer. On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Oops, a misprint. Fixed, thanks Pavel. > > -- > Denis > > > On 3/21/2016 6:14 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > >> Suspicious entries: >> * C++ API Ivan Veselovsky >> *

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

Oops, a misprint. Fixed, thanks Pavel. -- Denis On 3/21/2016 6:14 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: Suspicious entries: * C++ API Ivan Veselovsky * Docker, Mesos, YARN integration Igor Sapego On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Sergi Vladykin wrote: Looks good. Sergi

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

Suspicious entries: * C++ API Ivan Veselovsky * Docker, Mesos, YARN integration Igor Sapego On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Sergi Vladykin wrote: > Looks good. > > Sergi > > 2016-03-21 16:37 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda : > > > Igniters, > > > > I've

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

Looks good. Sergi 2016-03-21 16:37 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda : > Igniters, > > I've prepared a draft of the maintainers list. > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute#HowtoContribute-ReviewProcessandMaintainers > > Please review it and/or adjust

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

Igniters, I've prepared a draft of the maintainers list. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute#HowtoContribute-ReviewProcessandMaintainers Please review it and/or adjust it whenever is needed. If you have any thoughts, concerns let's discuss them there. -- Denis

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

If everyone is ok with the proposals, then we need to set this new approach and properly document it. Also we need to select list of RTC modules and elect their maintainers. Sergi 2016-03-05 19:31 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin : > +1 to the original proposal of Denis to

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

+1 to the original proposal of Denis to introduce module maintainers and RTC process +1 to the proposal of Raul to restrict number of core modules, which require maintainers review Sergi 2016-03-05 6:43 GMT+03:00 Konstantin Boudnik : > It saddens me to see this coming to it ;(

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

It saddens me to see this coming to it ;( On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 02:54PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Igniters, > > I would propose to switch back to review-then-commit process. This > process has to be followed by both contributors and committers. > > There is a reason for this I have in mind.

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

+1 on Raul’s proposal. -Roman On Friday, March 4, 2016 2:47 AM, Raul Kripalani wrote: I would +1 RTC for a finite set of modules – core, complex or strategic modules – in agreement with the community, e.g. ignite-core, ignite-spark, ignite-hadoop, ignite-indexing,

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Raul Kripalani wrote: > * CTR for contributors for all modules, for obvious reasons (no commit > access ;-)). > Obviously, I meant RTC! *Raúl Kripalani* PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and Messaging

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

+1 on Raul’s proposal, specifically ignite-core should always follow RTC process. On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Raul Kripalani wrote: > I would +1 RTC for a finite set of modules – core, complex or strategic > modules – in agreement with the community, e.g. ignite-core,

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

I would +1 RTC for a finite set of modules – core, complex or strategic modules – in agreement with the community, e.g. ignite-core, ignite-spark, ignite-hadoop, ignite-indexing, etc. But it seems counterproductive to impose strict RTC for modules like ignite-kafka, ignite-flume, ignite-twitter,

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

+1 (but I hope it's still up to a committer to decide whether a change should need a review or not.) On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > I hate to be religious about anything, but do think that for most of the > functionality, RTC makes sense. > >

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

I hate to be religious about anything, but do think that for most of the functionality, RTC makes sense. On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Raul Kripalani wrote: > I thought we were already on RTC process. > > What do you mean with contributors following this process? > > Raúl. >

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

I thought we were already on RTC process. What do you mean with contributors following this process? Raúl. On 3 Mar 2016 11:54, "Denis Magda" wrote: > Igniters, > > I would propose to switch back to review-then-commit process. This process > has to be followed by both

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

+1 - sounds very reasonable and practical. On 3/3/2016 5:54 AM, Denis Magda wrote: Igniters, I would propose to switch back to review-then-commit process. This process has to be followed by both contributors and committers. There is a reason for this I have in mind. Ignite is a complex

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

+1 from me. I could be a maintainer for following modules: visor-console, schema-import-utility, ignite-web-console, scalar. We could even copy-paste rules from Spark wiki to ours. On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Igniters, > > I would propose to switch