Re: KIP Meeting Notes 08/11/2015
From other communities, there isn't really ownership over any part of the project, so anyone is free to review any patch. If you decide to review a patch and believe that a specific person should have a look to support your recommendation because that person has more experience, just ping the person in the jira. It is also not uncommon that committers ping each other for a second opinion, but again anyone should be able to review any patch as I see it. -Flavio > On 11 Aug 2015, at 21:50, Grant Henke wrote: > >> >> 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA >> status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning themselves >> to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > > Is there somewhere that describes who to pick as a reviewer based on the > patch? Would it be worth listing volunteer reviews in a similar location? > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > >> First of all, WebEx seems working! And we will upload the recorded video >> later. >> >> Quick summary: >> >> KIP-26: RP-99 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/99) pending for >> reviews. >> >> KIP-28: RP-130 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/130) looking for >> feedbacks on: >> >> 1. API design (see o.k.a.stream.examples). >> 2. Architecture design (see KIP wiki page) >> 3. Packaging options. >> >> KIP-29: we will do a quick fix for unblocking production issues with >> hard-coded interval values, while at the same time keep the KIP open for >> further discussions about end state configurations. >> >> KIP-4: KAFKA-1695 / 2210 pending for reviews. >> >> Review Backlog Management: >> >> 1. Remind people to change JIRA status as "patch available" when they >> contribute the patch, and change the status back to "in progress" after it >> is reviewed, as indicated in: >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes >> >> 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA >> status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning themselves >> to "reviewers" for pending tickets. >> >> -- Guozhang >> > > > > -- > Grant Henke > Software Engineer | Cloudera > gr...@cloudera.com | twitter.com/gchenke | linkedin.com/in/granthenke
Re: KIP Meeting Notes 08/11/2015
Yeah. Jun used to send out table-summary of backlogs with reviews before KIP meeting, we can continue to do that. Also we used to have a dashboard for replication development tracking, Neha/Jun/Joel do you remember how to setup sth. similar? Guozhang On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Jiangjie Qin wrote: > Hey Guozhang, > > Will it be a little bit hard to keep the volunteer list up to date? > Personally I would prefer to have a summery e-mail automatically sent to > kafka-dev list every day for tickets with patches submitted in recent 7 > days. The email can also include the reviewer for the ticket. And people > can just take a look a the patch if it is not assigned to anyone. Similarly > we can also list the tickets that has been open for some time but haven't > been updated or closed. > > If getting email everyday is too much we can also do it weekly, although I > think people won't complain for one more email given there are already tons > of emails every day :) > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) QIn > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Good question. > > > > I can personally think of pros and cons of having a volunteer list, most > of > > them are pros but one con is that the list will never be comprehensive > and > > in that sense sort of discouraging people to assign themselves as the > > reviewer. > > > > Without such a list, contributors would most likely assign reviewers to > who > > they saw to have been a reviewer before or who they know of (i.e. a > > committer most of times). But we could try to encourage people re-assign > > review roles to who they think would be comfortable to do so (maybe they > > have contributed multiple patches on that module, or they have > participated > > discussions in that topic, or they are known to have the background, > etc), > > while at the same time encourage people to (re-)assign reviewer to > > themselves, and hope that over time more people to be observed as the > > "reviewers to go to". This may also help the community to grow > committers. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Guozhang > > > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Grant Henke > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change > JIRA > > > > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning > > > themselves > > > > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > > > > > > > > Is there somewhere that describes who to pick as a reviewer based on > the > > > patch? Would it be worth listing volunteer reviews in a similar > > location? > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Guozhang Wang > > wrote: > > > > > > > First of all, WebEx seems working! And we will upload the recorded > > video > > > > later. > > > > > > > > Quick summary: > > > > > > > > KIP-26: RP-99 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/99) pending for > > > > reviews. > > > > > > > > KIP-28: RP-130 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/130) looking > for > > > > feedbacks on: > > > > > > > > 1. API design (see o.k.a.stream.examples). > > > > 2. Architecture design (see KIP wiki page) > > > > 3. Packaging options. > > > > > > > > KIP-29: we will do a quick fix for unblocking production issues with > > > > hard-coded interval values, while at the same time keep the KIP open > > for > > > > further discussions about end state configurations. > > > > > > > > KIP-4: KAFKA-1695 / 2210 pending for reviews. > > > > > > > > Review Backlog Management: > > > > > > > > 1. Remind people to change JIRA status as "patch available" when they > > > > contribute the patch, and change the status back to "in progress" > after > > > it > > > > is reviewed, as indicated in: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes > > > > > > > > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change > JIRA > > > > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning > > > themselves > > > > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > > > > > > > -- Guozhang > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Grant Henke > > > Software Engineer | Cloudera > > > gr...@cloudera.com | twitter.com/gchenke | linkedin.com/in/granthenke > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Guozhang > > > -- -- Guozhang
Re: KIP Meeting Notes 08/11/2015
Hey Guozhang, Will it be a little bit hard to keep the volunteer list up to date? Personally I would prefer to have a summery e-mail automatically sent to kafka-dev list every day for tickets with patches submitted in recent 7 days. The email can also include the reviewer for the ticket. And people can just take a look a the patch if it is not assigned to anyone. Similarly we can also list the tickets that has been open for some time but haven't been updated or closed. If getting email everyday is too much we can also do it weekly, although I think people won't complain for one more email given there are already tons of emails every day :) Thanks, Jiangjie (Becket) QIn On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > Good question. > > I can personally think of pros and cons of having a volunteer list, most of > them are pros but one con is that the list will never be comprehensive and > in that sense sort of discouraging people to assign themselves as the > reviewer. > > Without such a list, contributors would most likely assign reviewers to who > they saw to have been a reviewer before or who they know of (i.e. a > committer most of times). But we could try to encourage people re-assign > review roles to who they think would be comfortable to do so (maybe they > have contributed multiple patches on that module, or they have participated > discussions in that topic, or they are known to have the background, etc), > while at the same time encourage people to (re-)assign reviewer to > themselves, and hope that over time more people to be observed as the > "reviewers to go to". This may also help the community to grow committers. > > Thoughts? > > Guozhang > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Grant Henke wrote: > > > > > > > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA > > > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning > > themselves > > > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > > > > > Is there somewhere that describes who to pick as a reviewer based on the > > patch? Would it be worth listing volunteer reviews in a similar > location? > > > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Guozhang Wang > wrote: > > > > > First of all, WebEx seems working! And we will upload the recorded > video > > > later. > > > > > > Quick summary: > > > > > > KIP-26: RP-99 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/99) pending for > > > reviews. > > > > > > KIP-28: RP-130 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/130) looking for > > > feedbacks on: > > > > > > 1. API design (see o.k.a.stream.examples). > > > 2. Architecture design (see KIP wiki page) > > > 3. Packaging options. > > > > > > KIP-29: we will do a quick fix for unblocking production issues with > > > hard-coded interval values, while at the same time keep the KIP open > for > > > further discussions about end state configurations. > > > > > > KIP-4: KAFKA-1695 / 2210 pending for reviews. > > > > > > Review Backlog Management: > > > > > > 1. Remind people to change JIRA status as "patch available" when they > > > contribute the patch, and change the status back to "in progress" after > > it > > > is reviewed, as indicated in: > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes > > > > > > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA > > > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning > > themselves > > > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > > > > > -- Guozhang > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Grant Henke > > Software Engineer | Cloudera > > gr...@cloudera.com | twitter.com/gchenke | linkedin.com/in/granthenke > > > > > > -- > -- Guozhang >
Re: KIP Meeting Notes 08/11/2015
Good question. I can personally think of pros and cons of having a volunteer list, most of them are pros but one con is that the list will never be comprehensive and in that sense sort of discouraging people to assign themselves as the reviewer. Without such a list, contributors would most likely assign reviewers to who they saw to have been a reviewer before or who they know of (i.e. a committer most of times). But we could try to encourage people re-assign review roles to who they think would be comfortable to do so (maybe they have contributed multiple patches on that module, or they have participated discussions in that topic, or they are known to have the background, etc), while at the same time encourage people to (re-)assign reviewer to themselves, and hope that over time more people to be observed as the "reviewers to go to". This may also help the community to grow committers. Thoughts? Guozhang On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Grant Henke wrote: > > > > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA > > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning > themselves > > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > > Is there somewhere that describes who to pick as a reviewer based on the > patch? Would it be worth listing volunteer reviews in a similar location? > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > First of all, WebEx seems working! And we will upload the recorded video > > later. > > > > Quick summary: > > > > KIP-26: RP-99 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/99) pending for > > reviews. > > > > KIP-28: RP-130 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/130) looking for > > feedbacks on: > > > > 1. API design (see o.k.a.stream.examples). > > 2. Architecture design (see KIP wiki page) > > 3. Packaging options. > > > > KIP-29: we will do a quick fix for unblocking production issues with > > hard-coded interval values, while at the same time keep the KIP open for > > further discussions about end state configurations. > > > > KIP-4: KAFKA-1695 / 2210 pending for reviews. > > > > Review Backlog Management: > > > > 1. Remind people to change JIRA status as "patch available" when they > > contribute the patch, and change the status back to "in progress" after > it > > is reviewed, as indicated in: > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes > > > > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA > > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning > themselves > > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > > > -- Guozhang > > > > > > -- > Grant Henke > Software Engineer | Cloudera > gr...@cloudera.com | twitter.com/gchenke | linkedin.com/in/granthenke > -- -- Guozhang
Re: KIP Meeting Notes 08/11/2015
> > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning themselves > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. Is there somewhere that describes who to pick as a reviewer based on the patch? Would it be worth listing volunteer reviews in a similar location? On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > First of all, WebEx seems working! And we will upload the recorded video > later. > > Quick summary: > > KIP-26: RP-99 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/99) pending for > reviews. > > KIP-28: RP-130 (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/130) looking for > feedbacks on: > > 1. API design (see o.k.a.stream.examples). > 2. Architecture design (see KIP wiki page) > 3. Packaging options. > > KIP-29: we will do a quick fix for unblocking production issues with > hard-coded interval values, while at the same time keep the KIP open for > further discussions about end state configurations. > > KIP-4: KAFKA-1695 / 2210 pending for reviews. > > Review Backlog Management: > > 1. Remind people to change JIRA status as "patch available" when they > contribute the patch, and change the status back to "in progress" after it > is reviewed, as indicated in: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Contributing+Code+Changes > > 2. Encourage contributors to set the "reviewer" field when change JIRA > status to "patch available", and encourage volunteers assigning themselves > to "reviewers" for pending tickets. > > -- Guozhang > -- Grant Henke Software Engineer | Cloudera gr...@cloudera.com | twitter.com/gchenke | linkedin.com/in/granthenke
