Also, it will be good to add “NO PRECOMMIT TESTS” in the description of the jira if the patches are really small and does not affect any tests (checkstyles, typos etc.) to avoid occupying a slot in the precommit queue which could be overloaded sometimes.
+1 for 2 days no response on dev-list. Thanks Prasanth > On Apr 11, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Lefty Leverenz <leftylever...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Maybe the process can be to solicit reviews for such minor patches by >> sending an email to dev@ list and if no response is seen in 2 days, go >> ahead and commit it ? >> > > Two days seems reasonable, perhaps excluding weekends and major holidays. > > -- Lefty > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Thejas Nair <thejas.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I agree we have a problem here. At least patches as small as this >> shouldn't take too long to get reviewed. >> >> Knox seems to consider a very large set of patches as being under CTR >> process. >> I think hive is very large and mature project that I would lean >> towards RTC process for most issues. I think we can make an exception >> for very minor patches such as fixing typos and and checkstyle issues. >> Maybe the process can be to solicit reviews for such minor patches by >> sending an email to dev@ list and if no response is seen in 2 days, go >> ahead and commit it ? >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've been a long-time contributor to Hive (5 or so years) and have been >>> voted in as a committer and I'm very grateful for that. I also understand >>> that my situation is different than most or lots of committers as I'm not >>> working for one of the big companies (Facebook, Cloudera, Hortonworks >> etc.) >>> where you can just ask someone sitting next to you to do a review. >>> >>> I'd really like to contribute more than I do currently but the process of >>> getting patches in is painful for me (and other 'outside' contributors) >> as >>> it is hard to get reviews & things committed. The nature of most of my >>> patches is very minor[1] (fixing typos, checkstyle issues etc.) and I >>> understand that these are not the most interesting patches to review and >>> are easy to miss. I don't blame anyone for this situation as I totally >>> understand it and have been on the other side of this for other projects. >>> >>> Is there anything we can do to make it easier for me and others like me >> to >>> contribute here? I absolutely see the value in having "cleaner" code and >>> when done in small batches it's usually not very disruptive either. >>> >>> The bylaws currently require a +1 from a committer who has not authored >> the >>> patch. Knox for example has a different policy [2] where they distinguish >>> between major features and minor things which can be committed freely. >>> >>> Hive could adopt something similar or like a middle ground. These are >> just >>> two suggestions: >>> >>> 1) Allow minor changes (up to the committers discretion) without >> requiring >>> an extra +1 >>> 2) Allow minor changes (up to the committers discretion) with Lazy >> approval >>> (i.e. wait 24 hours) >>> >>> Sorry for the long rant but I'd love some feedback on this and am looking >>> forward to contributing more in the future. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Lars >>> >>> [1] e.g. <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12467> >>> [2] < >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KNOX/Contribution+Process> >>
