+1 Jin Sun <isun...@gmail.com> 于2018年10月9日周二 上午2:10写道：
> +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. > >>>>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >
