Mixed up my J's! Thank you for catching Jarek :) On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:30 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> It was Jed's comment, but yes. I agree with it too :) > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 5:51 PM Briana Okyere > <briana.oky...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote: > > > Thank you Jarek, this is very helpful. > > > > With your input in mind, let's move forward with a more flexible > structure. > > If there is no clear Top PR, we can feature multiple. If there is, we can > > just include 1. > > > > Also, moving forward, committers and community members alike can bump > > specific PR's as we review them, making them more likely to be included > in > > the script. > > > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 3:37 PM Jed Cunningham <jedcunning...@apache.org > > > > wrote: > > > > > Just to clarify, I didn't mean we should highlight multiple PRs every > > > month. In that month none of @eumiro's PRs were individually enough to > be > > > highlighted but in bulk they were. That was an unusual situation > though. > > > > > > I think we should be flexible with it. I'm not opposed to having > multiple > > > per month, but if we do I think they should be equally notable. If we > > have > > > a clear winner, we should just highlight that one PR. My 2c. > > > > > > I'll also call out that we (committers, community members, anyone > > really!) > > > should toss protm on good candidates as we are reviewing stuff > > day-to-day. > > > That bumps up the score in the script and will help ensure the good > stuff > > > bubbles to the top of the scripts output! A quick search shows we've > done > > > this less than a dozen times so far. > > > > > >
