I have agreed that at this point a release is important. My goal was try to squeeze in a much goodness as possible into the release, but the important bug fixes should come first. Getting 1.x into a state where the release notes don't say that it is geared toward developers and testers is really huge.
I think Nifi is a great community otherwise I would participate in the mailing list, create Jira tickets and pull requests. I am only trying to strengthen the great thing that is going on here. We can always do better. I was not trying to put down this community only to participate and make it better. I think this conversation is an indication of how great this community is. Maybe I am being sensitive about this issue and trying to strengthen the nifi community even more, after coming from a conference where it was reported there was lots of excitement at first and now the participation in the community has really died down and they are struggling. I don't want to see that happen here. Cheers, Edgardo On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Andre <andre-li...@fucs.org> wrote: > Edgardo, > > Thank you for your feedback. We hear your comments and as a committer I can > share we are constantly looking to improve the PR process, having already > taken many of the steps you suggest. > > However, it is important to notice that the number of PRs should not be > seen as a metric of engagement by the development community: Most of us > will submit PRs so that our work can be carefully reviewed by our peers and > some of us will use JIRA patches to provide contributions. > > Having said that, it is true that some PRs may sit idle for a long time and > we are working to improve this pipeline. > > It was therefore no coincidence that I browsed most of the PRs performing > a triage of items that have been superseded or diverged from the current > code base. > > In fact, less than a month ago the dev team closed a number of stalled and > superseded PRs (commit cc5e827aa1dfe2f376e9836380ba63c15269eea8). > > Despite all the above, I think Joe has a point. The master contain a series > of important bug fixes and suspect the community would benefit from a > release sooner rather than later. > > Once again, thank you for your feedback and contribution. It is good to > have you here. > > Andre > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Edgardo Vega <edgardo.v...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Joe - You are correct I was mentioning the PRs that are currently open. > > > > Regardless of how it happens reducing the count of open PRs I believe to > be > > extremely important. Maybe I was hoping that the release could be a > forcing > > function to make that happen. I believe that developers are more willing > to > > contribute when they see that their PRs will actually be able accepted > and > > merged into the code base. Having a low number of open PRs in progress > is a > > great indication that the main nifi developers are fully engaged with the > > community. > > > > There are a few PRs that don't have any comments from committers at all. > I > > found one from August in that state. If that was my PR I don't think I > > would be so willing to put another one in anytime soon. I do get that > > sometime PRs get stalled by the originator, if so maybe a rule about > > closing them after a certain amount of time or being taken over by a core > > contributor if they think it worthwhile. > > > > I would like to shoutout to James Wing on my last PR he was quick to > > review, provided great comments, testing, and even some additional code. > It > > was a great PR experience. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Joe Percivall <joeperciv...@yahoo.com. > > invalid> wrote: > > > > > Joe, I think you misread. Edgardo is referring to the Pull Requests > that > > > are currently open, not the tickets assigned to the 1.1.0 version. > > > > > > I think these goals (releasing 1.1.0 and cutting down the PR count) > > should > > > be two different efforts. Doing a thorough job reviewing takes a > > > significant amount of time from both the reviewer and contributor. In > > order > > > to cut it down significantly would take much longer than a couple days. > > > > > > Also there has already been a lot of great new features and bug fixes > > > contributed to the 1.X line and I don't think it's worth holding up a > > 1.1.0 > > > release for tickets not assigned to this fix version. As an added bonus > > > though, I think many of the tickets tagged as 1.1.0 have PRs already > open > > > so closing those will make a large dent in the PR count. > > > > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > - - - - - - > > > Joseph Percivall > > > linkedin.com/in/Percivall > > > e: joeperciv...@yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, October 13, 2016 3:58 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > There are less than 30 right now. Many of the roughly 90+ JIRAs > > > opened on 1.1.0 were easily dispositioned to 1.2.0 or closed or just > > > had fix versions removed. > > > > > > We will need to have a push over the next bunch of days to deal with > > > reviewing/merging/moving the remaining items. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Edgardo Vega <edgardo.v...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > Joe, > > > > > > > > There are 75 PRs currently open. Why not make a push over the next > > bunch > > > of > > > > days to get them closed and then cut the release after that. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Team, > > > >> > > > >> There have been a ton of bugs fixed a few nice features. I would > like > > > >> to move to get Apache NiFi 1.1.0 release going pretty much based on > > > >> where we are now and plan to move most tickets to a new Apache NiFi > > > >> 1.2.0 version. We can try to get back on our roughly 6-8 week > release > > > >> schedule and shoot for a mid to late Nov release for NiFi 1.2.0 this > > > >> way as well. Please advise if anyone has any other views on this. In > > > >> the mean time I'll get the wheels in motion so you'll be seeing a > lot > > > >> of JIRA/issue updates to move version around. > > > >> > > > >> Thanks > > > >> Joe > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Tony Kurc <trk...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> > Sounds good Joe. I have no issue to you doing the rm'ing for it. > > > >> > > > > >> > On Oct 13, 2016 8:19 AM, "Joe Witt" <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >> Team, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> There are a lot of great fixes and improvements on the master > line > > > now > > > >> >> and we're at a good time window to start pushing for a release. > > > There > > > >> >> are, however, about 90+ JIRAs assigned to 1.1.0 which are open. > > I'm > > > >> >> going to go through them and remove fix versions where > appropriate. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> I'm happy to take on RM task for this release though if someone > > else > > > >> >> would like to take that on please advise. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Thanks > > > >> >> Joe > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > > > Edgardo > > > -- Cheers, Edgardo
