Looks good.
Robert Dale
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 3:35 PM Stephen Mallette
wrote:
> Updated dev docs (but didn't publish yet) -
>
> https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/commit/e1d57d6e076efbc68bbdf0fe0c121054a9d5152f
>
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:52 AM Ted Wilmes wrote:
>
> > That looks good,
Updated dev docs (but didn't publish yet) -
https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/commit/e1d57d6e076efbc68bbdf0fe0c121054a9d5152f
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:52 AM Ted Wilmes wrote:
> That looks good, thanks Stephen.
>
> --Ted
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:23 PM Stephen Mallette
> wrote:
>
> >
That looks good, thanks Stephen.
--Ted
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:23 PM Stephen Mallette
wrote:
> I'm going to quickly summarize this thread so that hopefully by Monday we
> have a plan to follow.
>
> We seem to agree that in the future we will go with the following review
> -the-commit (RTC)
I'm going to quickly summarize this thread so that hopefully by Monday we
have a plan to follow.
We seem to agree that in the future we will go with the following review
-the-commit (RTC) process:
1. Each change to TinkerPop release branches requires 3 +1s from committers
and no -1s OR
2. A
oops - Pieter, i read your post last night then replied this morning
thinking I remembered everything you wrote - you actually called for
different email/jira lists as well.I guess that would be helpful to
some but not others. For me personally, that would be massively burdensome
tbh.
On Wed,
Thanks for everyone's thoughts - some replies, first to Jason:
> but I agree that nagging is not a great path forward.
Robert Dale has already expressed his sadness that my nags are going away
> It'd be great to have these examples added to the maintainer guidelines.
i've said as much
Hi,
I feel like the project has become a bit too big and dispersed. A large
portion of the emails, jira or otherwise are irrelevant to my
interest/time/work.
Perhaps for version 4, TinkerPop could be broken up into more focused
projects with their own jira/email/process management.
Thanks for starting this conversation, Stephen. Lots of interesting tidbits
here, and perhaps some we can apply to other OSS projects.
> I'm not sure if committers/PMC members have just not had time to do
reviews or have not felt comfortable doing them
Probably a combination of both, especially
Good point, Ted - that wasn't clear and in truth I didn't think that
through well. I think we could say that that the +1 would come from a
committer. If the committer and submitter are one in the same then it has
its single VOTE and technically, the PR just goes through the week long
cooling
I fell way off the PR review train, I'll get back on. For clarification, is
that a +1 on top of the submitter +1? I'm thinking you
all just meant the submitter's +1 would be adequate after the lazy
consensus period but wanted to be sure. I'd be fine to moving with that. My
impression is that with
> It looks like its disabled for this project.
I don't think we can use the GitHub integration without getting off our
Apache Mirror (which we've discussed, but not really pulled the trigger on
for no particular reason other than the hassle of changing everything).
> Does it have to be in
There might be a better alternative to privately nagging ;-) Github has a
feature on the sidebar that can be used to request reviews from individuals
or groups. The heading has 'Reviewers' and, when it's active, has a gear
icon to select people. Github will then email the reviewers with the
I'm +1 on the idea of switching to lazy consensus after a single binding
plus one and a week for objection. TinkerPop has so many different modules
/ areas and committers have different expertise that is hard to get 3 votes
on something.
Other projects have the concept of main "reviewer" and this
I believe that the review process is not working so well anymore. I'm not
sure if committers/PMC members have just not had time to do reviews or have
not felt comfortable doing them, but for the most part they aren't getting
done and PRs are languishing. Personally, I like our process, but if it
14 matches
Mail list logo
