Thanks Samuele for your feedback. With CONTRIBUTING.md, we have separate ones for most of our repos and with some version branches already in place, they do form a bit of a maintenance issue. The 'Processes' doc is aimed mainly at Pekko committers while the CONTRIBUTING.md could be cut back somewhat to just focus on details that outside contributors need to know. It would be good not to duplicate all the Pekko committer focused processes in the CONTRIBUTING.md files.
I've just merged https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/pull/797 and made a couple of edits to the Processes doc based on your feedback. Feel free to create your own PRs or suggest further changes to the cwiki page. On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 at 16:26, Samuele Resca <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I went through the process and I'm pretty much happy with that. > That said, I noted down some questions that I have: > > - Is the merge of a PR happening by squashing + merging? Or is it at the > discretion of the committer that hits the merge button? > - Is it worth referring to this process[1] in the CONTRIBUTING.MD files of > the modules? > - I'm noticing that we label some issues with the milestone tags(for > example [2]). Is it something that should be documented in the process or > do we prefer keeping it as best effort? > - The CONTRIBUTING.MD file[3] specifies a set of tags to use to label > issues. There is no mention of the labels to use in the "2 Development" > section of the process. Do we want to review or have a list of predefined > tags to use? > > Thanks, > Samuele > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PEKKO/Processes > [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/milestone/5 > [3] https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#tags > > > Il giorno mer 15 nov 2023 alle ore 19:10 PJ Fanning <[email protected]> > ha scritto: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I think it is important that we can agree a basic set of documented > > processes. I'm proposing a small set of processes that lay a basic > > framework for collaboration. We only have a small number of regular > > contributors and another fairly small set of less frequent > > contributors so we need to have processes that require some oversight > > of changes without making the bar too high. I think my proposal [1] > > tries to make it easy for anyone to get involved and to avoid making > > the process too rigid for a small set of volunteer contributors to > > accept and apply changes. > > > > The doc reflects the informal processes that we currently follow. I am > > hoping for an open discussion. It's a year since we last discussed > > this. See the initial conversation [2]. The ASF lists web site doesn't > > seem to display the follow-up conversation properly its permalink is > > used. Have a look here [3[ and see the conversation starting on 1 Nov > > 2022 (Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Pekko processes). > > > > I would like to get something agreed over the next few weeks. We can > > always agree to make changes to the processes as the focus of the > > project and/or the structure of the project team changes. I think > > getting the processes documented is one of final steps that we need to > > make before applying to graduate to become an ASF Top Level Project. > > > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PEKKO/Processes > > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/0hohnn9v0xhxn0qblb196p7mcq7jzz00 > > [3] https://lists.apache.org/[email protected]:2022-11 > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
