Hi Igniters, Reviewer field has been added, feel free to set your JIRA username for issues you're going to review.
If you had a private conversation with a contributor/committer and he/she is going to review, please set his/her name. I discourage to set someone's username who is not going to review ticket to reviewer field. This field is not intended for requesting a review. Use mentions in that case. Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov ср, 15 мая 2019 г. в 17:15, Dmitry Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: > Infra request was created: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18378 > > On 2019/02/13 12:38:06, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> wrote: > > Igniters, is it still reasonable to add a reviewer field now? > > > > AFAIK, count of PA tickets (our review dept) is less than it was when the > > topic is started. So this proposal can be not actual anymore. > > > > If you agree, please consider picking up this ticket and contact INFRA > for > > adding the field. > > If not, let's close this discussion as not needed > > > > Sincerely, > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > чт, 27 сент. 2018 г. в 18:39, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>: > > > > > Hi Anton, > > > > > > Thank you for bringing this significant concern here. > > > > > > I'm going to use this field in total correspondence with assignee field > > > usage. We don't set assignee unless someone agrees to be a developer > for > > > that feature. > > > > > > Otherwise, it is better to keep an issue as unassigned. Same implies to > > > the reviewer field. > > > > > > So reviewer is someone, who is ready and going to do the review. > Unless we > > > not sure who will do a review, mention process continues to work. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c6013b99940de32aae831a0b76e8fd53febe5040e9e0d67abb4f62a5@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 27 сент. 2018 г. в 18:23, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>: > > > > > >> Currently, you may ask for a review by mention someone and asking him > to > > >> review. > > >> And this approach looks good to me. > > >> > > >> In case we'll invent reviewer field who will set the reviewer? > > >> It's NOT ok to set somebody as a reviewer! > > >> You should ask somebody to be a reviewer first. > > >> And in case he agrees he will just make a review. No reason to set a > > >> useless field in that case. > > >> > > >> вт, 25 сент. 2018 г. в 19:39, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > dsetrak...@apache.org>: > > >> > > >> > I like the idea. > > >> > > > >> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 8:25 AM Dmitriy Pavlov < > dpavlov....@gmail.com> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Hi Ignite Enthusiasts, > > >> > > > > >> > > During the planning of release 2.7, I've faced with the situation > > >> when it > > >> > > is completely not clear who is going to review ticket. > > >> > > > > >> > > Usually, we do not reassign tickets to a reviewer, but info about > > >> planned > > >> > > reviewer can be very useful for all reviewers, who select some > > >> > contribution > > >> > > to pick up into a review. > > >> > > > > >> > > Please share your vision about the idea of adding a reviewer field > > >> (type: > > >> > > user) in addition to the assignee field. > > >> > > > > >> > > If we agree I will try to ask the Infra team on Friday 28.09. > > >> > > > > >> > > Sincerely, > > >> > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
