+1
> On 9. Oct 2018, at 17:11, Hequn Cheng <chenghe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 3:25 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999)
>> <wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 发件人：vino yang <yanghua1...@gmail.com>
>>> 发送时间：2018年10月9日(星期二) 14:08
>>> 收件人：dev <dev@flink.apache.org>
>>> 主 题：Re: [DISCUSS] [Contributing] (2) - Review Steps
>>>
>>> +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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
