geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Stolz <mst...@pivotal.io>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Discussions of API changes missing or lost in noise
Date Thu, 01 Jun 2017 21:47:37 GMT
+1 to initiating a [DISCUSS] thread on dev list for any proposed changes to
the public API(s).

--
Mike Stolz
Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Manager
Mobile: +1-631-835-4771

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Kirk Lund <klund@apache.org> wrote:

> +1 to initiating a [DISCUSS] thread on dev list for any proposed changes to
> the public API(s).
>
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Dan Smith <dsmith@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > Hi devs,
> >
> > This is similar to the discussion John started about keeping track of
> > changes to geode. I'm seeing some changes happening to the public API
> that
> > I feel like maybe should have a more visible discussion. For example
> > GEODE-2892 (Region.sizeOnServer) or GEODE-3005 (new API for
> partitioning).
> >
> > I think we should have a clear policy to send an email with [DISCUSS] in
> > the header to mailing list for changes to the public API, behavior, or
> > dependencies. Or wiki
> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/
> > Criteria+for+Code+Submissions>
> > says that changes should be discussed, but it doesn't really specify how.
> >
> > Part of the issue is that I find it impossible to keep up with the amount
> > of JIRA noise on the dev list, so just creating a JIRA is not enough for
> me
> > to notice a new API change. I propose that we segregate all of this
> > automated email onto a separate list, either geode-commits or some new
> > list. I'd like to segregate anything not directly sent by a human -
> JIRAs,
> > PRs, and reviewboards.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message