+1 for enforcing the PIP procedures. > And the CI can try to add labels `doc required` or `wants/proposal` > according to the list selections.
Is it possible that the CI can check if there is a "voted" PIP linking to this PR. And the label can be manually added by committers if the PR author missed checking the boxes. Thanks, Haiting On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 4:07 PM PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I agree a proposal would be better before adding a PR. But the > document part must be a part of such a proposal. > > Make sense. It looks like we should have a checklist for the proposal. > The documentation changes should be listed in the proposal. > > > Can the PR template/GitHub process check that if either the api changes > and doc-required are checked both are checked with textual information > provided? > > It's a good idea. > I haven't tried, but it looks like it's possible. > We have this list: > > ``` > ### Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts: > > *If the box was checked, please highlight the changes* > > - [ ] Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency) > - [ ] The public API > - [ ] The schema > - [ ] The default values of configurations > - [ ] The binary protocol > - [ ] The REST endpoints > - [ ] The admin CLI options > - [ ] Anything that affects deployment > ``` > > And the CI can try to add labels `doc required` or `wants/proposal` > according to the > list selections. > > And we can add `The metrics` item to the list. > > Thanks, > Penghui > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:52 PM Dave Fisher <wave4d...@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On Dec 6, 2022, at 9:45 PM, Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Penghui, > > > > > >> But maybe some are missed. > > > > > > That's the point. Each PR that adds or modifies a metric item must be > > > labeled with "doc-required" and the related documents should be added. > > > However, these PRs are nearly all labeled with "doc-not-needed". > > > > > > I agree a proposal would be better before adding a PR. But the > > > document part must be a part of such a proposal. > > > > Can the PR template/GitHub process check that if either the api changes > > and doc-required are checked both are checked with textual information > > provided? > > > > Best, > > Dave > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Yunze > > > > > >> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 11:48 AM PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi Yunze, > > >> > > >> All the metrics are listed here > > >> https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/2.10.x/reference-metrics/ > > >> > > >> But maybe some are missed. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Penghui > > >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 11:46 AM Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> I agree. It should have required the PIP. > > >>> > > >>> I have another question. Is there any document to describe these > > >>> metrics? I think the metrics body should be documented well to avoid > > >>> breaking changes. Some external applications might parse the metrics > > >>> according to a specific structure. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> Yunze > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 11:38 AM PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi all, > > >>>> > > >>>> I would like to start a discussion about requiring a proposal for > > Admin > > >>>> API/CLI > > >>>> and metrics changes. > > >>>> > > >>>> Here are some recent examples that changed the Admin API but without > > >>>> proposals. > > >>>> I just checked the commit logs. Maybe some have a proposal. Just > > forgot > > >>> to > > >>>> add > > >>>> the proposal link to the PR. > > >>>> > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18218 > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17153 > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16167 > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14930 > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17337 > > >>>> > > >>>> And here are metrics-related proposals. But looks like we don't have a > > >>>> clear rule > > >>>> for this part (the proposal is required or not) > > >>>> > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/18319 > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/18560 > > >>>> > > >>>> As more and more users are using Pulsar in production. > > >>>> But the Admin API changes and metrics changes have > > >>>> not required a proposal. This may pose a risk to users. > > >>>> The proposal will have better visibility, and voting is required. > > >>>> > > >>>> And actually, all the public API changes are proposals required. > > >>>> > > >>> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/wiki/proposals/PIP.md#when-is-a-pip-required > > >>>> But in fact, this is not strictly enforced. > > >>>> > > >>>> Is it time to require a proposal for Admin API/CLI and metrics > > changes? > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks, > > >>>> Penghui > > >>> > > > >
