+1 Peter Huang <huangzhenqiu0...@gmail.com> 于2018年10月9日周二 下午1:54写道：
> +1 > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:47 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:36 PM Tzu-Li Chen <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > +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. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
