Hi everyone, could a few more PMC members please head over to the user@ mailing list and vote?
Thank you! On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay I have started a VOTE thread on the user@ mailing list (as per the > bylaws). I would appreciate it if you could head over there and vote :) > > Thank you! > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:41 AM, Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Thanks for the +1 Alan. >> >> I agree that we're leaving potential contributions on the floor. Doing >> more reviews is definitely a very good step in the right direction. Thank >> you! I see this Bylaws change as another (small) step in the right >> direction. I'm sure we can come up with more ideas. >> >> I'll start a VOTE thread on the user@ mailing list. >> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Alan Gates <alanfga...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I’m +1 on this change of allowing simple cleanup changes without >>> requiring a full review. >>> >>> But jumping to this fix obscures a bigger problem we have as a >>> community. This fix only works for committers, not for non-committers who >>> may also contribute such patches. And it doesn’t solve the situation for >>> non-trivial patches. We’re leaving potential contributions on the floor >>> and keeping people out of our community. We need to solve this. >>> >>> One thing I’ve been doing over the last few months is set up a filter in >>> JIRA for components that I know well (metastore, acid, etc.) and then put a >>> recurring task in my task tracker app to review a patch every day. >>> Realistically I manage 2-3 reviews a week, but that’s 1-2 more than I was >>> doing before. I encourage my fellow committers to find something that >>> works for them. We need to improve the health of our community. >>> >>> Alan. >>> >>> > On Apr 12, 2016, at 07:56, Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Thanks Thejas for the suggestion & others for jumping in. That seems >>> fine >>> > for me. 2 days also seems good. Holidays are different in almost every >>> > country so I wouldn't exclude those. >>> > >>> > I have followed the procedure used for the last Bylaws change and >>> created a >>> > new Wiki page here: < >>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Proposed+Changes+to+Hive+Project+Bylaws+-+April+2016 >>> >> . >>> > >>> > It includes this paragraph: "Minor issues (e.g. typos, code style >>> issues, >>> > JavaDoc changes. At committer's discretion) can be committed after >>> > soliciting feedback/review on the mailing list and not receiving >>> feedback >>> > within 2 days." >>> > I'm not a native speaker so feedback is welcome. >>> > >>> > I also fixed three typos in the Bylaws (and marked them as changed): < >>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=62691925&selectedPageVersions=3&selectedPageVersions=2 >>> >> >>> > >>> > Once the discussion settles down I'll open a vote thread on the user@ >>> > mailing list which requires a 2/3 majority of all active PMC members. I >>> > couldn't find a definition of "active" though. >>> > >>> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:26 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 >>> > >>> >> >>> >>> >> >
