NIkolay, Do you mean technical ability?
чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 10:33, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: > > Hello, Ivan. > > Do we have the ability to close PRs from other contributors? > > В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 09:12 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > Igniters, > > > > I would like to resume a discussion about PRs cleanup. Additionally > > to concerns provided earlier some TC Bot operations are slowed down > > due to a huge amount of open PRs. > > > > As time has passed, I ask you all again to share an opinion about > > centralized cleanup of obsolete PRs. Also, a precise criteria to > > consider PR as obsolete is a subject for dicsussion as well. > > > > чт, 13 дек. 2018 г. в 11:55, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11 Dec 2018, at 10:10, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello, Ivan. > > > > > > > > Personally, I keep my PR's clear. > > > > So, I don't have dozens of opened PR. > > > > > > > > But, I don't support Dmitriy proposal for several reasons: > > > > > > > > 1. We introduce some new, not required, level of bureaucracy. > > > > From my experience - not required bureaucracy is a BAD thing. > > > > > > > > 2. We spread our work pattern to whole community. > > > > I believe there are many patterns of dealing with *YOUR OWN* PRs. > > > > Some of them can lead to dozens of opened PRs to master. > > > > Whats wrong with it? > > > > > > > > 3. I dont' see any issues with many opened PRs. > > > > What problem we trying to solve? > > > > > > But I see. > > > Lots of opened PRs (and obsolete branches as well) consumes huge amount > > > of data and time when TC performs changes detect operations (every > > > minute, BTW). > > > Also, IMO, ORDER is not an unnecessary level of bureaucracy, but part of > > > the project development workflow in area of cleaning up and keeping > > > everything fresh and actual. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Closing abanodned PRs doesn't force anybody to review the rest. > > > > Instead of ordering something to one way or another, let's solve real > > > > problem: > > > > > > > > - help the community doing PR review. > > > > - fixing failing tests. > > > > - introducing new code inspections to make our code base clear. > > > > - making Ignite improvements > > > > > > > > 5. I don't see how our numbers differs from other Apache projects > > > > > > > > Apache Kafka - 533 PR opened. > > > > Apache Spark - 484 PR opened. > > > > Apache Flink - 430 PR opened. > > > > > > > > В Вт, 11/12/2018 в 09:24 +0300, Pavel Tupitsyn пишет: > > > > > Agree with Dmitriy. > > > > > > > > > > We use GitHub PRs in our workflow, therefore we should keep them in > > > > > order. > > > > > > > > > > We can close PRs that refer to closed tickets, this can be done with a > > > > > simple script. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 9:15 AM Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Nikolay, > > > > > > > > > > > > I must say that when I first saw 1K+ open PRs my first thought was > > > > > > that something was wrong with a review process. In my mind in not > > > > > > very > > > > > > big project open PR list can reflect very well the real work in > > > > > > progress. For bigger projects things become more complicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy, > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have some cleanup automation in mind? Immediately I think > > > > > > that > > > > > > it is fully safe to close all PRs that were not touched more than a > > > > > > year. > > > > > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г. в 20:01, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The main concern is related to chances that newcomer will have to > > > > > > > obtain > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > review support from the community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, a lot of people doing their best to provide a feedback > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > newcomers, and count of issues still in PA state goes down (84 is > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > relatively small count of issues in PA state). But 1428 PRs may > > > > > > > imply we > > > > > > > don't review here, as we have tons of incomplete PRs. Actually, > > > > > > > most of > > > > > > > these PRs were merged (but not using ./apply-pull-request.sh > > > > > > > script, but > > > > > > > manually, without reference to PRs). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another benefit of revising this list, if there are any changes > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > were not accomplished with a proper ticket with PA status, we will > > > > > > > > > > > > identify > > > > > > > a number of additional contributions to be applied to the > > > > > > > codebase. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г. в 19:53, Nikolay Izhikov > > > > > > > <nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Dmitriy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What, exactly concerns newcomers? > > > > > > > > What is wrong with opened PR? > > > > > > > > How project will benefit from closed PR? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same proposal is related to IEP statuses. If you were > > > > > > > > > involved > > > > > > > > > > > > in an > > > > > > > > IEP, please validate its status > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. We should maintain IEP description up to date. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г., 19:15 Dmitriy Pavlov dpav...@apache.org: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Newcomers to Apache Ignite sometimes became concerned about > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > open PRs > > > > > > > > > in the project. Apache Ignite TC Bot also performs runs > > > > > > > > > checks with > > > > > > > > > > > > a PR > > > > > > > > > open. Apache Ignite pulls list > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/pulls > > > > > > > > > contains > > > > > > > > > 1442 PRs open while only 84 issues are waiting for review. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please verify the list of your PRs in Apache Ignite > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/pulls and close every not needed/already > > > > > > > > > merged > > > > > > > > > change? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same proposal is related to IEP statuses. If you were > > > > > > > > > involved > > > > > > > > > > > > in an > > > > > > > > > IEP, please validate its status here > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Active+Proposals > > > > > > > > > Please > > > > > > > > > set a correct state for your IEP, as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask > > > > > > > > > here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > in advance! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > > > > > > > > -- Best regards, Ivan Pavlukhin
