I didn't notice much of a difference as a contributor. +1 vote
Best,
Wei
> On Jan 30, 2024, at 11:41 AM, Amogh Desai wrote:
>
> Contrary to my initial expectation of the trouble this would bring in for
> reviewers, it has been
> pretty nice. I have not faced any issues in marking the
Contrary to my initial expectation of the trouble this would bring in for
reviewers, it has been
pretty nice. I have not faced any issues in marking the conversations as
resolved for the pull
requests I have reviewed and it has even given me a chance to re review
prior to approval.
I am happy
I've had a few conversations with Astronomer customers within the past few
days who are looking for an approved way to create datasets outside of the
dag parsing process. They are already - or are considering - using some
sort of custom process similar to what Steve suggested in the github
I personally haven't had too much friction due to the change and it has
helped me keep track of any comments people have made. I remain +1 to the
change so far.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024, 6:11 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Just wanted to remind everyone, we are nearing the end of
Just wanted to remind everyone, we are nearing the end of the trial period
for "require conversation" feature to be enabled. I have my own
observations and examples, but since I was the one to propose it, I am
likely biased, so I'd love to hear from others what their feedback and
assessment is. Or
