>> Speaking for myself, as a volunteer here, I do what I can, when I can, with >> a eye toward using my time wisely while balancing many other >> responsibilities. >> Commons has over 20 components, some I use at work, some I used at play, >> some I do not use. >> I do my best to pick low hanging fruits, fix bugs that could be >> troublesome, and implement new features I feel would clearly benefit a >> component's community, or that I simply need. >> All of this takes time; thow in this mailing list, JIRAs, PRs from GitHub, >> and that's a lot to chew on. IOW, be patient, manage your expectations ;-) > I never doubt this. I know you are busy and put a lot of effort on commons. And your helps/suggestions are actually really helpful in most of the times. Thank you. > I'm just, kind of curious about how things works here normally. > Thanks. I have a strange feeling as most of my prs are reviewed by you, a PMC, but not a normal committer. Is it a normal state? Or what wrongs/mistakes did I make? Because I think normal committers should be the group who review most of the prs, and PMC committers shall struggle for some more important things, maybe I mis-understand somethings(again)?
Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月12日周五 下午10:01写道： > > Speaking for myself, as a volunteer here, I do what I can, when I can, > with > > a eye toward using my time wisely while balancing many other > > responsibilities. > > Commons has over 20 components, some I use at work, some I used at play, > > some I do not use. > > I do my best to pick low hanging fruits, fix bugs that could be > > troublesome, and implement new features I feel would clearly benefit a > > component's community, or that I simply need. > > All of this takes time; thow in this mailing list, JIRAs, PRs from > GitHub, > > and that's a lot to chew on. IOW, be patient, manage your expectations > ;-) > I never doubt this. I know you are busy and put a lot of effort on > commons. And your helps/suggestions are actually really helpful in most of > the times. Thank you. > I'm just, kind of curious about how things works here normally. > Thanks. > > Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月12日周五 下午9:56写道： > >> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:44 AM Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> 8. What should we do when we have a pr delayed for a long time? And >> how >> > >> long is thought to be an unusual long time for waiting? 3 days.1 >> week,or >> > 1 >> > >> month? >> > >> > > They might have been forgotten, or there may other issues. >> > > Examples? >> > >> > for 1 year example: >> > https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/pull/428 >> > for half year example: >> > https://github.com/apache/commons-vfs/pull/78 >> > (I have no idea whether it is already resolved, as I have not received >> any >> > report about it being resolved, and the pr is still not closed or marked >> > resolved by someone.) >> > for two weeks example: >> > too many. >> > As I said above, I have no better way for detecting whether a repo is >> > "active", so I send some "trying minor prs" to every repo (nearly). >> > Most of them have no response. >> > No approving, no rejection, no modification suggestions. >> > If you really wanna details, I will try to make a list for you. >> > >> >> Speaking for myself, as a volunteer here, I do what I can, when I can, >> with >> a eye toward using my time wisely while balancing many other >> responsibilities. >> Commons has over 20 components, some I use at work, some I used at play, >> some I do not use. >> I do my best to pick low hanging fruits, fix bugs that could be >> troublesome, and implement new features I feel would clearly benefit a >> component's community, or that I simply need. >> All of this takes time; thow in this mailing list, JIRAs, PRs from GitHub, >> and that's a lot to chew on. IOW, be patient, manage your expectations ;-) >> >> HTH, >> Gary >> >> >> > >> > >> > Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月12日周五 下午9:36写道： >> > >> > > >> Are they under a same (or at least >> > > >> similar) management mechanism? Or just sharing a common prefix? >> > > >> > > > Do you mean the development tools (maven, git)? >> > > > There some measure of "standardization" through the parent POM >> > > > file, but nothing is really enforced. The code style depends on the >> > > > regular contributors (and how old the codebase was when it was >> > > > considered "mature"). >> > > >> > > So...if we treat a repo as a city, there should be some regular >> > > contributors like Mayor or something, and PMCs are more like Special >> > Envoy >> > > from the King, correct? >> > > And in usual cases the "some regular contributors" are people who >> review >> > > prs. >> > > But what will happen if the "some regular contributors" all become >> busy >> > > and nobody be willing to review? >> > > Is there a mechanism for this situation? >> > > >> > > Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月12日周五 下午9:29写道： >> > > >> > >> Hi. >> > >> >> > >> >> 2. How are commons projects related? >> > >> >> > >> > They are not necessarily related. Usually it is considered >> > >> > a feature if a component has zero dependency (as it is was >> > >> > easier to avoid "JAR hell"). >> > >> > However, there are also drawbacks, e.g. duplicating functionality >> > >> > (and work) needed by several components. >> > >> >> > >> Something was not quite right about this. >> > >> For example, in commons-vfs, we just use commons-lang3 as a >> dependency. >> > >> But in commons-email, we fork some of utility functions in >> commons-lang3 >> > >> as a java class in commons-email. >> > >> Which is the right way, or a more commonly accepted way in commons >> > >> projects? >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> 于2020年6月12日周五 下午9:07写道： >> > >> >> > >>> Hello. >> > >>> >> > >>> Le ven. 12 juin 2020 à 13:51, Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> a >> > écrit : >> > >>> > >> > >>> > 1. How can a project *** becomes commons-***, or how did a >> > commons-*** >> > >>> > project started? What is the actual procedural? >> > >>> >> > >>> For new components, this list would be the place to make the >> > >>> proposal. A discussion would decide if "Apache Commons" is >> > >>> the right place (given the interest/capacity of the current team). >> > >>> >> > >>> > 2. How are commons projects related? >> > >>> >> > >>> They are not necessarily related. Usually it is considered >> > >>> a feature if a component has zero dependency (as it is was >> > >>> easier to avoid "JAR hell"). >> > >>> However, there are also drawbacks, e.g. duplicating functionality >> > >>> (and work) needed by several components. >> > >>> >> > >>> > Are they under a same (or at least >> > >>> > similar) management mechanism? Or just sharing a common prefix? >> > >>> >> > >>> Do you mean the development tools (maven, git)? >> > >>> There some measure of "standardization" through the parent POM >> > >>> file, but nothing is really enforced. The code style depends on the >> > >>> regular contributors (and how old the codebase was when it was >> > >>> considered "mature"). >> > >>> >> > >>> > 3. How is commons projects' version control, based on function or >> > >>> based on >> > >>> > time? >> > >>> >> > >>> A backward-compatible release has its minor version number >> > >>> increased; otherwise both the major number and the base package >> > >>> are changed. >> > >>> >> > >>> > 4. Why some projects are on svn, some on gitbox, and some on >> github? >> > >>> >> > >>> All actively developed components were (will be) moved to "gitbox" >> > >>> (decision made a few years ago, cf. "dev" M archive). >> > >>> Those remaining on SVN are probably mainly "dormant" (except >> > >>> perhaps for some security fix). >> > >>> >> > >>> IIUC, a "GitHub" mirror is automatically created for every new >> > >>> "gitbox" Apache project. >> > >>> >> > >>> > 5. What problems shall be put on mailing list, and what problems >> > shall >> > >>> be >> > >>> > put on Jira? >> > >>> >> > >>> ML: proposal, discussion on design, ... >> > >>> JIRA: identified bugs (with references and/or unit test), accepted >> > >>> feature, discussion on implementation details, ... >> > >>> >> > >>> > 6. Is there quite some dead projects in commons? And how to >> > detect/mark >> > >>> > them? >> > >>> >> > >>> Depends on the definition of "dead". >> > >>> None of the components in "proper" are considered dead, even if >> > >>> they are not actively developed anymore (whether this is "good" >> > >>> or "bad" is another question). >> > >>> I haven't seen anything in "sandbox" being developed for a long >> > >>> time (until the last few days where "Commons Graph" seems it >> > >>> may be revived). >> > >>> Unless I'm mistaken, a project in "dormant" has been subject to >> > >>> decision for stopping its development. >> > >>> >> > >>> > 7. What is the general waiting time for a pr to be reviewed(and >> > >>> rejected or >> > >>> > accepted)? In my own observation the waiting time is between [1 >> days, >> > >>> 1.5 >> > >>> > years) , is it a little...large? >> > >>> >> > >>> It boils down to the level of involvement of a committer for the >> > >>> component being the target of the PR. >> > >>> Developers being volunteers, it certainly also depends on the >> > >>> balance between the usefulness of the PR and the work required >> > >>> from the reviewer. >> > >>> >> > >>> > 8. What should we do when we have a pr delayed for a long time? >> And >> > how >> > >>> > long is thought to be an unusual long time for waiting? 3 days.1 >> > >>> week,or 1 >> > >>> > month? >> > >>> >> > >>> They might have been forgotten, or there may other issues. >> > >>> Examples? >> > >>> >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Sorry for having so many questions, but I'm just very curious. >> > >>> >> > >>> Hope the above answers have helped. >> > >>> >> > >>> Regards, >> > >>> Gilles >> > >>> >> > >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >> >
