hive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Reviews & commits (RTC/CTR), contributions, bylaws
Date Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:54:35 GMT
Hi everyone,

could a few more PMC members please head over to the user@ mailing list and
vote?

Thank you!

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Lars Francke <lars.francke@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Okay I have started a VOTE thread on the user@ mailing list (as per the
> bylaws). I would appreciate it if you could head over there and vote :)
>
> Thank you!
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:41 AM, Lars Francke <lars.francke@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the +1 Alan.
>>
>> I agree that we're leaving potential contributions on the floor. Doing
>> more reviews is definitely a very good step in the right direction. Thank
>> you! I see this Bylaws change as another (small) step in the right
>> direction. I'm sure we can come up with more ideas.
>>
>> I'll start a VOTE thread on the user@ mailing list.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Alan Gates <alanfgates@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I’m +1 on this change of allowing simple cleanup changes without
>>> requiring a full review.
>>>
>>> But jumping to this fix obscures a bigger problem we have as a
>>> community.  This fix only works for committers, not for non-committers who
>>> may also contribute such patches.  And it doesn’t solve the situation for
>>> non-trivial patches.  We’re leaving potential contributions on the floor
>>> and keeping people out of our community.  We need to solve this.
>>>
>>> One thing I’ve been doing over the last few months is set up a filter in
>>> JIRA for components that I know well (metastore, acid, etc.) and then put a
>>> recurring task in my task tracker app to review a patch every day.
>>> Realistically I manage 2-3 reviews a week, but that’s 1-2 more than I was
>>> doing before.  I encourage my fellow committers to find something that
>>> works for them.  We need to improve the health of our community.
>>>
>>> Alan.
>>>
>>> > On Apr 12, 2016, at 07:56, Lars Francke <lars.francke@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Thanks Thejas for the suggestion & others for jumping in. That seems
>>> fine
>>> > for me. 2 days also seems good. Holidays are different in almost every
>>> > country so I wouldn't exclude those.
>>> >
>>> > I have followed the procedure used for the last Bylaws change and
>>> created a
>>> > new Wiki page here: <
>>> >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Proposed+Changes+to+Hive+Project+Bylaws+-+April+2016
>>> >> .
>>> >
>>> > It includes this paragraph: "Minor issues (e.g. typos, code style
>>> issues,
>>> > JavaDoc changes. At committer's discretion) can be committed after
>>> > soliciting feedback/review on the mailing list and not receiving
>>> feedback
>>> > within 2 days."
>>> > I'm not a native speaker so feedback is welcome.
>>> >
>>> > I also fixed three typos in the Bylaws (and marked them as changed): <
>>> >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=62691925&selectedPageVersions=3&selectedPageVersions=2
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Once the discussion settles down I'll open a vote thread on the user@
>>> > mailing list which requires a 2/3 majority of all active PMC members. I
>>> > couldn't find a definition of "active" though.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Thejas Nair <thejas.nair@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I agree we have a problem here. At least patches as small as this
>>> >> shouldn't take too long to get reviewed.
>>> >>
>>> >> Knox seems to consider a very large set of patches as being under CTR
>>> >> process.
>>> >> I think hive is very large and mature project that I would lean
>>> >> towards RTC process for most issues. I think we can make an exception
>>> >> for very minor patches such as fixing typos and and checkstyle issues.
>>> >> Maybe the process can be to solicit reviews for such minor patches by
>>> >> sending an email to dev@ list and if no response is seen in 2 days,
>>> go
>>> >> ahead and commit it ?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Lars Francke <lars.francke@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>> Hi,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I've been a long-time contributor to Hive (5 or so years) and have
>>> been
>>> >>> voted in as a committer and I'm very grateful for that. I also
>>> understand
>>> >>> that my situation is different than most or lots of committers as
>>> I'm not
>>> >>> working for one of the big companies (Facebook, Cloudera, Hortonworks
>>> >> etc.)
>>> >>> where you can just ask someone sitting next to you to do a review.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I'd really like to contribute more than I do currently but the
>>> process of
>>> >>> getting patches in is painful for me (and other 'outside'
>>> contributors)
>>> >> as
>>> >>> it is hard to get reviews & things committed. The nature of
most of
>>> my
>>> >>> patches is very minor[1] (fixing typos, checkstyle issues etc.)
and I
>>> >>> understand that these are not the most interesting patches to review
>>> and
>>> >>> are easy to miss. I don't blame anyone for this situation as I
>>> totally
>>> >>> understand it and have been on the other side of this for other
>>> projects.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Is there anything we can do to make it easier for me and others
like
>>> me
>>> >> to
>>> >>> contribute here? I absolutely see the value in having "cleaner"
code
>>> and
>>> >>> when done in small batches it's usually not very disruptive either.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The bylaws currently require a +1 from a committer who has not
>>> authored
>>> >> the
>>> >>> patch. Knox for example has a different policy [2] where they
>>> distinguish
>>> >>> between major features and minor things which can be committed
>>> freely.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Hive could adopt something similar or like a middle ground. These
are
>>> >> just
>>> >>> two suggestions:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 1) Allow minor changes (up to the committers discretion) without
>>> >> requiring
>>> >>> an extra +1
>>> >>> 2) Allow minor changes (up to the committers discretion) with Lazy
>>> >> approval
>>> >>> (i.e. wait 24 hours)
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Sorry for the long rant but I'd love some feedback on this and am
>>> looking
>>> >>> forward to contributing more in the future.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Cheers,
>>> >>> Lars
>>> >>>
>>> >>> [1] e.g. <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12467>
>>> >>> [2] <
>>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KNOX/Contribution+Process
>>> >
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

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