hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lars hofhansl <lhofha...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: DISCUSSION: Component Lieutenants?
Date Sat, 15 Sep 2012 04:15:57 GMT
I like that idea.

Should all PMC members or committers be at top level of the source tree? Or will that just
take us back to the status-quo?

I certainly like that a typical patch then will involve multiple reviewer, and it will be
more defined who should look at what patch.

-- Lars

----- Original Message -----
From: Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com>
To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: DISCUSSION: Component Lieutenants?

I like the idea of lieutenants, but another option would be a
"multi-lieutenant" model.

The model used at google is that each directory has a file called
"OWNERS" which lists several usernames, one per line.

For any given patch, you are expected to get a review such that, for
each modified file, one of the OWNERS listed in that directory (or any
parent thereof) has +1ed.

So, for example, imagine that hbase/OWNERS has only Stack, and
hbase/foo/component1/OWNERS has "jxiang,larsh". If I make a patch
which touches something in foo/component1/bar/, I'd need a review from
at least one of Jimmy, Lars, or Stack.

The assumption is that you try to get review from the most specific
owner, but if those people are MIA, you get review from someone higher
up the stack. The multi-person-per-dir model also ensures that, if
someone's on vacation or otherwise busy, we don't get blocked. And it
formalizes in the actual source tree who you should probably email if
you have questions about an area.

It also means that wide-ranging patches that touch multiple components
need a lot of reviewers (or someone higher up the chain of command who
has "permission" on the whole tree). So if I had a mondo patch that
touched the region server, the master, and the IPC layer, I'd probably
need at least three separate people to sign off.

Whatever we do, rather than making it a strict policy, let's start out
with a soft touch. Perhaps declare the component maintainers and try
to pick reviewers based on the criteria. But if people are busy and
work needs to get done, we don't need to be anal about it :)


On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> At the contributor's pow wow a few days ago [1], during a discussion
> about whether or not commits should have more friction applied -- i.e.
> have more review before they go in -- it was thought that we might
> benefit if we had "lieutenants" over-seeing individual HBase
> components.  A lieutenant would be someone who has an interest and an
> understanding of how a particular component works (or should work).  A
> lieutenant does not need to be a committer.  Before committing a patch
> that touched on a particular component, the patch would have to have
> been +1'd by the component lieutenant before it could go in (or if the
> lieutenant is MIA, it was suggested by the Mighty Jon Hsieh that two
> +1s by other contributors/committers would do instead; this latter
> rule would probably also apply when a patch spanned components).
> We already have a few folks signed up, knowingly or otherwise, as
> component owners [1].
> What do folks think?
> Should we go ahead w/ this project?  If so, any volunteers (I signed
> up a few of the obvious component leads)?  I can add you as component
> lieutenant into JIRA.  We can add more components if you don't see
> your interest listed.
> St.Ack
> 1. http://www.meetup.com/hbaseusergroup/events/80621872/

Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

View raw message