ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anton Vinogradov ...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Clean up of our PRs and IEPs before 2019
Date Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:47:52 GMT
Peter,

Not sure I've got how you're going to keep this ok in future.
This crusade is useful only in case you have the plan.

>> And closing PRs after merge or some decent waiting period of inactivity
seems to be at least sign of respect to each other of our community.
We have to find an easy (automated) way instead of respectful :)
For example, PRs should be automatically closed once issue resolved.

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 2:42 PM Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com> wrote:

> Anton,
>
>
> Maintaining order always worth it.
> If we did not made this mess initially, no crusade would be required now.
> And closing PRs after merge or some decent waiting period of inactivity
> seems to be at least sign of respect to each other of our community.
>
> Anyway, looks like that this task can be done in half-lazy pace without
> much of the disturbance to anyone.
>
>
> > On 25 Jul 2019, at 13:44, Anton Vinogradov <av@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Is it possible just to ignore obsolete PRs somehow?
> > Not sure this crusade worth it.
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 1:18 PM Павлухин Иван <vololo100@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Maxim,
> >>
> >> Quite a nice idea. Could we go even further? Add a comment to each 1-2
> >> year old PR asking if the author could close it (most likely with help
> >> of some automation). As I know GitHub sends emails with PR comments to
> >> authors.
> >>
> >> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 13:05, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov@apache.org>:
> >>>
> >>> Folks, please close not needed PRs.
> >>>
> >>> I don't have contact with Pyatkov & dkarachentsev. Folks, please step
> in.
> >>> Also, feel free to reopen PRs if you still want change to be merged.
> >>>
> >>> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 12:39, Maxim Muzafarov <maxmuzaf@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>>> Folks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Can we contact with some members manually and ask them to close unused
> >>>> PRs? Most of the users are active community members, so I think they
> >>>> will respond quite fast.
> >>>>
> >>>> I've briefly checked GitHub:
> >>>>
> >>>> dkarachentsev - 62 opened PRs
> >>>> ilantukh - 58 opened PRs
> >>>> dgovorukhin - 44 opened PRs
> >>>> mcherkasov - 23 opened PRs
> >>>> ascherbakoff  - 22 opened PRs
> >>>> vldpyatkov - 21 opened PRs
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 12:28, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Alexey,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> second need it to check all open PRs from community members for
> >> fixes,
> >>>>> which could be merged to Ignite codebase.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Which is why I'm not so sure that we should automatically close.
I
> >> ask
> >>>>> everyone to close their PRs, and I manually double-check PRs remained
> >>>>> opened.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The third need is to automatically tests all opened PRs and provide
> >> visas
> >>>>> to every PR we have. In case we have PRs with 0 blockers we should
> >> take
> >>>> it
> >>>>> into review process. No all newcomers aware of TC Bot, so I would
> >> like to
> >>>>> automate this process as much as possible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sincerely,
> >>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov
> >>>>>
> >>>>> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 12:22, Alexey Zinoviev <zaleslaw.sin@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The long period totally reduces the discontent and outrage of
> >> community
> >>>>>> members (if you reduce to 2-6 weeks it could be intersected
with
> >> human
> >>>>>> events of most part of contributors like vacation, birthdays,
> >> wedding,
> >>>> spam
> >>>>>> filters and etc.), believe me (I have the same experience as
I
> >>>> mentioned)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> From the other hand, what the real reason to reduce it to the
> >> shorter
> >>>>>> period? Bot needs? Robot needs?
> >>>>>> Robot could wait, I hope:)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 14:08, Павлухин Иван
<vololo100@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alexey,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yep, I imagined a similar procedure in my mind. Just curious,
> >> why do
> >>>>>>> you think that a period before actions are taken should
be so
> >> long
> >>>>>>> (3-6 months)?.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 11:55, Alexey Zinoviev <
> >> zaleslaw.sin@gmail.com
> >>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Dear Igniters, I have one suggestion
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If a most of commiters will support idea of automatic
> >> "cleaning",
> >>>> we
> >>>>>>> should
> >>>>>>>> provide next options
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>   - declare a long period for putting labels or leaving
> >> comments
> >>>> for
> >>>>>>>>   useful PRs from their authors (about 3-6 months)
> >>>>>>>>   - generate notifications for all authors of all PRs
with
> >>>>>> clarification
> >>>>>>>>   of our goals
> >>>>>>>>   - every month reminder in dev-list and via e-mail
to each
> >> PR's
> >>>>>> author
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The best way, of course, the closing by our hands in
each
> >> module
> >>>> and
> >>>>>> area
> >>>>>>>> with tags "obsolete" or something else.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> P.S. I was in the same situation in Open Street Map
community
> >> and
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>> principles for automated cleaning were the same like
suggested
> >> by
> >>>>>> myself
> >>>>>>>> above
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I hope that we will be careful with our community
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 13:23, Dmitriy Pavlov <
> >> dpavlov@apache.org>:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Nikolay, committer could after setting up a link
between GH &
> >>>> Apache
> >>>>>>>>> accounts.
> >>>>>>>>> https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 11:17, Nikolay Izhikov
<
> >>>> nizhikov@apache.org>:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Yes.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Do someone have permission to close my(or any
other
> >>>> contributor) PR
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> apache/ignite?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 11:05 +0300, Павлухин
Иван пишет:
> >>>>>>>>>>> NIkolay,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Do you mean technical ability?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 10:33, Nikolay
Izhikov <
> >>>>>> nizhikov@apache.org
> >>>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Ivan.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Do we have the ability to close PRs
from other
> >>>> contributors?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 09:12 +0300,
Павлухин Иван пишет:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to resume a discussion
about PRs
> >> cleanup.
> >>>>>>>>> Additionally
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to concerns provided earlier some
TC Bot operations
> >> are
> >>>>>> slowed
> >>>>>>> down
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> due to a huge amount of open PRs.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As time has passed, I ask you all
again to share an
> >>>> opinion
> >>>>>>> about
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> centralized cleanup of obsolete
PRs. Also, a precise
> >>>> criteria
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> consider PR as obsolete is a subject
for dicsussion
> >> as
> >>>> well.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> чт, 13 дек. 2018 г. в 11:55,
Petr Ivanov <
> >>>>>> mr.weider@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11 Dec 2018, at 10:10,
Nikolay Izhikov <
> >>>>>>> nizhikov@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Ivan.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I keep my PR's
clear.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, I don't have dozens
of opened PR.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, I don't support Dmitriy
proposal for several
> >>>>>> reasons:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. We introduce some new,
not required, level of
> >>>>>>> bureaucracy.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From my experience - not
required bureaucracy is
> >> a
> >>>> BAD
> >>>>>>> thing.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. We spread our work pattern
to whole community.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe there are many
patterns of dealing with
> >>>> *YOUR
> >>>>>>> OWN*
> >>>>>>>>> PRs.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some of them can lead to
dozens of opened PRs to
> >>>> master.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whats wrong with it?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. I dont' see any issues
with many opened PRs.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What problem we trying to
solve?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I see.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lots of opened PRs (and obsolete
branches as well)
> >>>> consumes
> >>>>>>> huge
> >>>>>>>>>> amount of data and time when TC performs changes
detect
> >>>> operations
> >>>>>>> (every
> >>>>>>>>>> minute, BTW).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, IMO, ORDER is not an unnecessary
level of
> >>>>>> bureaucracy,
> >>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>> part of the project development workflow in
area of
> >> cleaning
> >>>> up and
> >>>>>>>>> keeping
> >>>>>>>>>> everything fresh and actual.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Closing abanodned PRs
doesn't force anybody to
> >>>> review
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> rest.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Instead of ordering something
to one way or
> >> another,
> >>>>>> let's
> >>>>>>>>> solve
> >>>>>>>>>> real problem:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      - help the community
doing PR review.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      - fixing failing tests.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      - introducing new code
inspections to make
> >> our
> >>>> code
> >>>>>>> base
> >>>>>>>>>> clear.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      - making Ignite improvements
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. I don't see how our numbers
differs from other
> >>>> Apache
> >>>>>>>>> projects
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Kafka - 533 PR opened.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Spark - 484 PR opened.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Flink - 430 PR opened.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> В Вт, 11/12/2018 в 09:24
+0300, Pavel Tupitsyn
> >> пишет:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with Dmitriy.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We use GitHub PRs in
our workflow, therefore we
> >>>> should
> >>>>>>> keep
> >>>>>>>>>> them in order.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can close PRs that
refer to closed tickets,
> >>>> this can
> >>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>> done with a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simple script.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018
at 9:15 AM Павлухин Иван <
> >>>>>>>>>> vololo100@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nikolay,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I must say that
when I first saw 1K+ open
> >> PRs my
> >>>>>> first
> >>>>>>>>>> thought was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that something was
wrong with a review
> >> process.
> >>>> In my
> >>>>>>> mind
> >>>>>>>>>> in not very
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> big project open
PR list can reflect very
> >> well
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> real
> >>>>>>>>> work
> >>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. For bigger
projects things become
> >> more
> >>>>>>>>> complicated.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have some
cleanup automation in mind?
> >>>>>>> Immediately I
> >>>>>>>>>> think that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is fully safe
to close all PRs that were
> >> not
> >>>>>> touched
> >>>>>>>>> more
> >>>>>>>>>> than a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пн, 10 дек.
2018 г. в 20:01, Dmitriy Pavlov <
> >>>>>>>>>> dpavlov@apache.org>:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The main concern
is related to chances that
> >>>>>> newcomer
> >>>>>>> will
> >>>>>>>>>> have to obtain
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review support
from the community.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, a
lot of people doing their best
> >> to
> >>>>>>> provide a
> >>>>>>>>>> feedback to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> newcomers, and
count of issues still in PA
> >>>> state
> >>>>>> goes
> >>>>>>>>> down
> >>>>>>>>>> (84 is a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relatively small
count of issues in PA
> >> state).
> >>>> But
> >>>>>>> 1428
> >>>>>>>>>> PRs may imply we
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't review
here, as we have tons of
> >>>> incomplete
> >>>>>> PRs.
> >>>>>>>>>> Actually, most of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these PRs were
merged (but not using
> >>>>>>>>>> ./apply-pull-request.sh script, but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manually, without
reference to PRs).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another benefit
of revising this list, if
> >>>> there are
> >>>>>>> any
> >>>>>>>>>> changes which
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were not accomplished
with a proper ticket
> >>>> with PA
> >>>>>>>>> status,
> >>>>>>>>>> we will
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> identify
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a number of
additional contributions to be
> >>>> applied
> >>>>>>> to the
> >>>>>>>>>> codebase.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пн, 10 дек.
2018 г. в 19:53, Nikolay
> >> Izhikov <
> >>>>>>>>>> nizhikov@apache.org>:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Dmitriy.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What, exactly
concerns newcomers?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is
wrong with opened PR?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How project
will benefit from closed PR?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
same proposal is related to IEP
> >>>> statuses.
> >>>>>> If
> >>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>>>> were involved
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in an
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IEP, please
validate its status
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1. We should
maintain IEP description
> >> up to
> >>>>>> date.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пн, 10
дек. 2018 г., 19:15 Dmitriy Pavlov
> >>>>>>>>>> dpavlov@apache.org:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Newcomers
to Apache Ignite sometimes
> >> became
> >>>>>>> concerned
> >>>>>>>>>> about many
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open PRs
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the
project. Apache Ignite TC Bot
> >> also
> >>>>>>> performs
> >>>>>>>>>> runs checks with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a PR
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open.
Apache Ignite pulls list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pulls
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1442
PRs open while only 84 issues are
> >>>> waiting
> >>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>> review.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could
you please verify the list of
> >> your
> >>>> PRs in
> >>>>>>>>> Apache
> >>>>>>>>>> Ignite
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/pulls
 and close
> >> every
> >>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>> needed/already merged
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
same proposal is related to IEP
> >>>> statuses.
> >>>>>> If
> >>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>>>> were involved
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in an
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IEP,
please validate its status here
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Active+Proposals
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set
a correct state for your IEP, as
> >> well.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should
you have any questions, please
> >> don't
> >>>>>>> hesitate
> >>>>>>>>>> to ask here.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in advance!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sincerely,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy
Pavlov
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ivan Pavlukhin
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>> Ivan Pavlukhin
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >> Ivan Pavlukhin
> >>
>
>

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