Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

I agree with Andy on the Docker point, I think it could be too high a barrier for contribution in some cases. However I think we can build out / extend a "new component" section of the PR template that has more best practices, recommendations, suggestions. I like the idea of the reviewer

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

Mike, I think that would be awesome for reviewers (and that is where most of my time is spent on the review side), but I also think that sets a really high bar for contribution. Many of the users who submit pull requests are first-time contributors or new to the project, and I believe the

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

It looks like there are at least 10 new processors and services in the backlog, and quite a few modifications to existing ones. Something I think would really help here is to expand the scope of requirements for submitting a new processor for code review to include: 1. docker-compose file that

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

This is a great idea, Mark, thanks for proposing it. 30 days after last review comment seems like a good, enforceable standard. James On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:29 AM, Mark Payne wrote: > All, > > We do from time to time go through the backlog of PR's that need to be >

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

Thanks. I’ll take a look. On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 at 7:49 AM, Aldrin Piri wrote: > Hello, > > Yes, this is unrelated (or at least I believe) and is an effort within the > ASF. There is not a lot of information available, but the associated page > is

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

Hello, Yes, this is unrelated (or at least I believe) and is an effort within the ASF. There is not a lot of information available, but the associated page is https://gitbox.apache.org/. On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Sivaprasanna wrote: > Apologies. I’m very new

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

Apologies. I’m very new to contributing so I’m not aware of gitbox. One question this gitbox that is being discussed here is in no way related to this one http://www.gitboxapp.com/. Correct? On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 at 1:13 AM, Pierre Villard wrote: > Agree with

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

Agree with everything being said here. We clearly need to better manage the number of opened PRs and also remind the community that contributing code is great but that helping in the review process will create a virtuous circle and benefit the community. Pierre 2018-01-29 18:48 GMT+01:00 Joe

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

maybe kick that gitbox thread to a vote since it is decent change to the workflow. Thanks On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Aldrin Piri wrote: > Gitbox was favorably received when we discussed it prior: >

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

Gitbox was favorably received when we discussed it prior: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/de5e103994f356b1b8a572410938eef44af8cb352210e35305c04bc9@%3Cdev.nifi.apache.org%3E I would be in favor of moving ahead with it and would be happy to get things moving if it still seems agreeable.

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

I definitely agree with all of these points. With our current setup, the only way a committer can close a PR is by issuing a commit with the magic "This closes ..." clause. The submitter of the PR is the only one who can actually close it in GitHub. I don't want to hijack the discussion with a

Re: [DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

Mark Thanks for brining this up. I do agree. We need to probably provide more description on the contributor guide or elsewhere of which aspects makes PRs easier to commit: - They have unit tests which cover core capabilities but if they're cloud service dependent or highly network/disk

[DISCUSS] Addressing Lingering Pull Requests

All, We do from time to time go through the backlog of PR's that need to be reviewed and start a "cleansing" process, closing out any old PR's that appear to have stalled out. When we do this, though, we typically will start sending out e-mails asking if there are any stalled PR's that we