Contrary to my initial expectation of the trouble this would bring in for reviewers, it has been pretty nice. I have not faced any issues in marking the conversations as resolved for the pull requests I have reviewed and it has even given me a chance to re review prior to approval.
I am happy with this overall and my vote will be a +1 Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 7:56 PM Aritra Basu <aritrabasu1...@gmail.com> wrote: > I personally haven't had too much friction due to the change and it has > helped me keep track of any comments people have made. I remain +1 to the > change so far. > > -- > Regards, > Aritra Basu > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024, 6:11 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > Just wanted to remind everyone, we are nearing the end of the trial > period > > for "require conversation" feature to be enabled. I have my own > > observations and examples, but since I was the one to propose it, I am > > likely biased, so I'd love to hear from others what their feedback and > > assessment is. Or maybe we need more time to assess it ? > > > > I would love to hear your thoughts. > > > > J, > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 2:20 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > > > After an initial indentation problem in .asf.yaml it's not working as > > > expected. So .... let's see how resolving conversations will work for > us. > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 12:17 PM Amogh Desai <amoghdesai....@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Wooho! Looking to see how this turns out for airflow 😃 > > >> > > >> On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 at 1:35 PM, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >> > Hello everyone, > > >> > > > >> > As discussed in > > >> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/cs6mcvpn2lk9w2p4oz43t20z3fg5nl7l I > > just > > >> > enabled "require conversation resolution" for our main/stable > > branches. > > >> We > > >> > have not used it in the past so it might not work as we think or we > > >> might > > >> > need to tweak something. > > >> > > > >> > Generally speaking (if all works) all conversations on PRs should be > > >> > resolved before we can merge the PR. This "resolving" is encouraged > to > > >> be > > >> > done by the author when they think the conversation is resolved, but > > it > > >> can > > >> > also be done by reviewers or the maintainer who wants to merge the > PR. > > >> > > > >> > We attempted to describe some basic rules and expectations here: > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.rst#step-5-pass-pr-review > > >> > but undoubtedly there will be questions and issues that we might > want > > to > > >> > solve - so feel free to discuss it here or raise question/issues in > > >> > #development channel in slack (I am also happy to be pinged directly > > >> about > > >> > it and help to resolve any issues/gather feedback). > > >> > > > >> > J. > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
