+1, look forward to see the change.
> On Oct 9, 2018, at 12:07 AM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Since we have addressed all comments (please raise your voice if not!), I
> would like to move forward and convert the proposal [1] into a page for
> Flink's website [2].
> I will create a pull request against the website repo [3].
>
> Once the page got merged, we can start posting the review form on new pull
> requests.
>
> Best, Fabian
>
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yaX2b9LNh-6LxrAmE23U3D2cRbocGlGKCYnvJd9lVhk
> [2] https://flink.apache.org
> [3] https://github.com/apache/flink-web
>
> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 17:56 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <wander4...@gmail.com
>> :
>
>> I agree with Chesnay that we don't guarantee (quick) review of a PR at the
>> project level. As ASF statement[1]:
>>
>>> Please show some patience with the developers if your patch is not
>> applied as fast as you'd like or a developer asks you to make changes to
>> the patch. If you do not receive any feedback in a reasonable amount of
>> time (say a week or two), feel free to send a follow-up e-mail to the
>> developer list. Open Source developers are all volunteers, often doing the
>> development in their spare time.
>>
>> However, an open source community shows its friendliness to contributors.
>> Thus contributors believe their contribution would be take care of, even be
>> rejected with a reason; project members are thought kind to provide help to
>> the process.
>>
>> Just like this thread kicked off, it is glad to see that Flink community
>> try best to help its contributors and committers, then take advantage of
>> "open source".
>>
>> Best,
>> tison.
>>
>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/contributors#patches
>>
>>
>> Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> 于2018年9月25日周二 下午11:21写道：
>>
>>> There is no guarantee that a PR will be looked at nor is it possible to
>>> provide this in any way on the project level.
>>>
>>> As far as Apache is concerned all contributors/committers etc. work
>>> voluntarily, and
>>> as such assigning work (which includes ownership if it implies such) or
>>> similar is simply not feasible.
>>>
>>> On 25.09.2018 16:54, Thomas Weise wrote:
>>>> I think that all discussion/coordination related to a contribution / PR
>>>> should be handled through the official project channel.
>>>>
>>>> I would also prefer that there are no designated "owners" and
>> "experts",
>>>> for the reasons Fabian mentioned.
>>>>
>>>> Ideally there is no need to have "suggested reviewers" either, but then
>>>> what will be the process to ensure that PRs will be looked at?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Thomas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:17 AM Tzu-Li Chen <wander4...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Fabian,
>>>>>
>>>>> You convinced me. I miss the advantage we can take from mailing lists.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now I am of the same opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> tison.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> 于2018年9月25日周二 下午3:01写道：
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think questions about Flink should be posted on the public mailing
>>>>> lists
>>>>>> instead of asking just a single expert.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's many reasons for that:
>>>>>> * usually more than one person can answer the question (what if the
>>>>> expert
>>>>>> is not available?)
>>>>>> * non-committers can join the discussion and contribute to the
>>> community
>>>>>> (how can they become experts otherwise?)
>>>>>> * the knowledge is shared on the mailing list (helps in cases when
>> only
>>>>> one
>>>>>> person can answer the question)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Last but not least, my concern is that committers for popular
>>>>> contribution
>>>>>> areas would be flooded with requests.
>>>>>> Even without being listed as a "component expert", I cannot handle
>> all
>>>>>> review requests directed at me.
>>>>>> I work on issues (PR reviews, my contributions, discussions) that I
>>> deem
>>>>>> important and being constantly pinged does not really help to speed
>>>>> things
>>>>>> up.
>>>>>> There are of course cases when it is important to be notified, but
>> IMO
>>>>>> chances that those get the right attention decrease with the number
>> of
>>>>>> requests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best, Fabian
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 04:10 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <
>>>>>> wander4...@gmail.com
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>> Thanks for start the discussion Stephan!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (1) Do we agree on the five basic steps below?*
>>>>>>> +1 to the five steps and making the third question in the proposal
>> the
>>>>>>> first.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (2) How do we understand that consensus is reached about adding the
>>>>>>> feature?
>>>>>>> +1 to lazy consensus with one committer's +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (3) To answer the question whether a PR needs special attention
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Contributor can ask for special attention, which is treated as a
>>>>>>> suggestion.
>>>>>>> Committer can ask for another committers' attention, either for
>> advice
>>>>> or
>>>>>>> transfer
>>>>>>> the right of decision.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMO it is quite help to add a page about "component experts", attach
>>> or
>>>>>>> link it
>>>>>>> from README. This would be a really helpful information to new
>>>>>> contributors
>>>>>>> so that they know to whom he can cc or ask for advice. Besides it
>>> would
>>>>>>> be helpful for those who want to know more about the mechanism
>>>>> underneath
>>>>>>> Flink, now they know with whom they can consult.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> tison.
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
