Edgardo, You mentioned a PR from August. I'd be happy to help you work that through review.
Thanks Joe On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Edgardo Vega <edgardo.v...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 a triage of items that have been superseded or diverged from the current 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 superseded PRs (commit cc5e827aa1dfe2f376e9836380ba63c15269eea8).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
