Awesome! This looks great! I don't know if it fits in with the templates somewhere, but many times folks post on GitHub, it's asking - when will this be released? I know Shad always responds with lots of details of what is remaining and where help is needed - so I wonder if we can avoid the same question/answer for that with a link in these templates?
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 at 08:48, <[email protected]> wrote: > Shad, > > > I don't think we should discard the whole template, though - it is > helpful > to know ahead of time if your PR is likely to get rejected. This is > something that can help to increase contributions, even though on the > surface it appears as a detractor. > > I agree. > > > But on the other hand, if we required an open issue first we could > eliminate wasting everyone's time by having someone do the work to submit a > PR and us having to review it only to reject it because they didn't bother > to discuss whether we would accept such a PR. > > > I see that too. It's a fair point. > > > BTW - one thing I also considered that both Lucene and ASP.NET Core have > is a "Test" issue category. In ASP.NET Core, it is to report a failing > test > to quarantine. In Lucene, it is to report a test failure or request a new > test. Not sure we need either one of these, but I would like to hear others > weigh in on it. > > I wouldn't. Simpler is better. > > > There is also a way to have a "General" category that allows the user to > pass through without a template as would be the case without setting up the > templates. We could use it to see if there are any issues that cannot be > categorized any other way that we need to address as a new template, but it > also gives the user the ability to abuse our issues list by submitting > issue > spam like we have now. > > I think it's better without a "General" category. Having such a category > could negate the desired process improvement. > > It's be interesting to see what thoughts other devs chime in with. > > -Ron Clabo > Apache Lucene.NET Committer > > -----Original Message----- > From: Shad Storhaug <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 10:20 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: GitHub Issue/PR Templates > > Thanks for the feedback Ron! > > > As for whether the dev mailing list should be on that page under some > category...to me, it feels like it should. I guess I'd kinda expect to see > it under a category that is something like ".NET specific API improvements" > maybe with a description like "Please discuss all .NET specific API > improvements on the Lucene.NET developer mailing list. This provides an > opportunity for the community to way in and helps us gauge the level of > interest in the proposed improvement." > > Agreed. This sounds like a good addition. > > As for the PR checklist, I see your point. I don't think we should discard > the whole template, though - it is helpful to know ahead of time if your PR > is likely to get rejected. This is something that can help to increase > contributions, even though on the surface it appears as a detractor. > > But perhaps we should limit the checkboxes to only the first 3. Opening an > issue first is sort of the norm on most repositories and that is what > experienced contributors often do, but I am not sure it really needs to be > a > requirement. I also often submit PRs that don't have a related issue and it > would slow me down if I had to take that extra step. > > But on the other hand, if we required an open issue first, we could > eliminate wasting everyone's time by having someone do the work to submit a > PR and us having to review it only to reject it because they didn't bother > to discuss whether we would accept such a PR. That is specifically what the > "Don't push your pull requests" article we link to is about: > https://www.igvita.com/2011/12/19/dont-push-your-pull-requests/. > > BTW - one thing I also considered that both Lucene and ASP.NET Core have > is > a "Test" issue category. In ASP.NET Core, it is to report a failing test > to > quarantine. In Lucene, it is to report a test failure or request a new > test. > Not sure we need either one of these, but I would like to hear others weigh > in on it. > > There is also a way to have a "General" category that allows the user to > pass through without a template as would be the case without setting up the > templates. We could use it to see if there are any issues that cannot be > categorized any other way that we need to address as a new template, but it > also gives the user the ability to abuse our issues list by submitting > issue > spam like we have now. > > One more thing to keep in mind is that if the user goes through an issue > template, it is possible to automatically tag the issue, which can help us > build more automation as a response to a specific category of issue. > > Thanks, > Shad Storhaug > Project Chairperson - Apache Lucene.NET > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 7:54 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: GitHub Issue/PR Templates > > I love the work on the https://s.apache.org/lucenenet-issue which I stated > in my other response. But I have mixed feelings about the about the PR > checklist. > > On one hand, the checklist is not unreasonable, but on the other hand, it's > likely to reduce contributions, and I think in general we'd like to > increase > community contributions if we can get the community focused on the actual > work that needs to be done. > > Especially in light of the new guidance being given on issues I feel like > it > might be good to give a bit of time to see how that improves things before > rolling the https://s.apache.org/lucenenet-pr checklist approach. Just a > thought. > > -Ron Clabo > Apache Lucene.NET Committer > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Shad Storhaug <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 7:45 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: GitHub Issue/PR Templates > > Hello all, > > I have been working on setting up some issue and PR templates in GitHub so > we don't have people submitting "How-To" questions and PRs for features > from > newer versions of Lucene - issues that eat up a lot of our time to review. > > https://s.apache.org/lucenenet-issue > https://s.apache.org/lucenenet-pr > > Let's consider this a draft. I am just looking for some feedback from the > Lucene.NET committers (and community) to make sure the templates fit in > with > our goals and Apache policies before we add them to our repository. I took > a > lot of pointers from both the Lucene repository and ASP.NET Core > repository. > > https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/new/choose > https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/new/choose > > Please let me know if you think there are things that need polishing, > categories to be added, or language that needs to be softened or made more > inclusive. > > Thanks, > Shad Storhaug > Project Chairperson - Apache Lucene.NET > > > > > > >
