Hi,
thanks for reactions so far. I agree that there are many questions that
have to be clarified. I'd propose to split this into two parts:
a) first reach a consensus that we want this process in the first place
b) after that, we need to clarify all the details - that will probably
be somewhat iterative procedure
I'm not sure if there is something more we need to clarify before we can
cast a vote on (a).
Thoughts?
Jan
On 12/10/19 3:46 PM, Łukasz Gajowy wrote:
+1 for formalizing the process, enhancing it and documenting clearly.
I noticed that Apache Airflow has a cool way of both creating AIPs and
keeping track of all of them. There is a "Create new AIP"
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Improvements+Proposals>
button on their Confluence. This way, no AIP gets lost and all are
kept in one place. Please keep in mind that this is also the problem
we want to solve in Beam and try to keep track of all the documents we
have so far*. It's certainly good to solve that problem too, if possible.
Also the AIP structure
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-10+Multi-layered+and+multi-stage+official+Airflow+CI+image>
is something that I find nice - There's place for all additional
resources, JIRAs, discussion in comments and state of the proposal.
Even if we don't choose to use Confluence, we definitely could use a
similar template with all that information for our google docs
proposals or any other tool we stick to.
Thanks!
*thank you, Ismael and Alexey, for all the reminders under the
proposals to add them to Confluence list
<https://beam.apache.org/contribute/design-documents/>! :)
wt., 10 gru 2019 o 13:29 jincheng sun <sunjincheng...@gmail.com
<mailto:sunjincheng...@gmail.com>> napisał(a):
Thanks for bring up this discussion Jan!
+1 for cearly define BIP for beam.
And I think would be nice to initialize a concept document for
BIP. Just a reminder: the document may contains:
- How many kinds of improvement in beam.
- What kind of improvement should to create a BIP.
- What should be included in a BIP.
- Who can create the BIP.
- Who can participate in the discussion of BIP and who can vote
for BIP.
- What are the possible limitations of BiP, such as whether it is
necessary to complete the dev of BIP in one release.
- How to track a BIP.
Here is a question: I found out a policy[1] in beam, but only
contains the poilcy of release , my question is does beam have
something called Bylaws? Similar as Flink[1].
Anyway, I like your proposals Jan :)
Best,
Jincheng
[1] https://beam.apache.org/community/policies/
[2]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Bylaws#FlinkBylaws-Approvals
David Morávek <david.mora...@gmail.com
<mailto:david.mora...@gmail.com>> 于2019年12月10日周二 下午2:33写道：
Hi Jan,
I think this is more pretty much what we currently do, just a
little bit more transparent for the community. If the process
is standardized, it can open doors for bigger contributions
from people not familiar with the process. Also it's way
easier to track progress of BIPs, than documents linked from
the mailing list.
Big +1 ;)
D.
On Sun, Dec 8, 2019 at 12:42 PM Jan Lukavský <je...@seznam.cz
<mailto:je...@seznam.cz>> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to revive a discussion that was taken some year
and a half ago
[1], which included a concept of "BIP" (Beam Improvement
Proposal) - an
equivalent of "FLIP" (flink), "KIP" (kafka), "SPIP"
(spark), and so on.
The discussion then ended without any (public) conclusion,
so I'd like
to pick up from there. There were questions related to:
a) how does the concept of BIP differ from simple plain
JIRA?
b) what does it bring to the community?
I'd like to outline my point of view on both of these
aspects (they are
related).
BIP differs from JIRA by definition of a process:
BIP -> vote -> consensus -> JIRA -> implementation
This process (although it might seem a little unnecessary
formal) brings
the following benefits:
i) improves community's overall awareness of planned and
in-progress
features
ii) makes it possible to prioritize long-term goals
(create "roadmap"
that was mentioned in the referred thread)
iii) by casting explicit vote on each improvement
proposal diminishes
the probability of wasted work - as opposed to our current
state, where
it is hard to tell when there is a consensus and what
actions need to be
done in order to reach one if there isn't
iv) BIPs that eventually pass a vote can be regarded as
"to be
included in some short term" and so new BIPs can build
upon them,
without the risk of having to be redefined if their
dependency for
whatever reason don't make it to the implementation
Although this "process" might look rigid and corporate, it
actually
brings better transparency and overall community health.
This is
especially important as the community grows and becomes
more and more
distributed. There are many, many open questions in this
proposal that
need to be clarified, my current intent is to grab a grasp
about how the
community feels about this.
Looking forward to any comments,
Jan
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
