mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Module maintainers proposal
Date Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:50:54 GMT
Have you read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"?

http://www.unterstein.net/su/docs/CathBaz.pdf

One of the points I took from this is that once a project finds its stride,
it actually runs more efficiently without centralization than with.

-Chris

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Marco de Abreu <
marco.g.abreu@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> you have a good point about people being afraid of reviewing PRs which they
> are not assigned to and I totally agree that we should encourage everybody
> to review PRs.
>
> One important advantage I see in this is the notification: since we are not
> using the feature to required an approval, this step is entirely for
> information purpose. I, for example, would like to get notified if a PR to
> change a CI file would be created. Just as an example: over Christmas, a PR
> to update mkl has been pushed without me knowing about it. Somehow, after
> my vacation, we started to get issues with mkl test - I only found out
> about this PR after quite a long investigation. If we would extend the
> usage of the code maintainers, we'll make sure that changes like these will
> notify the people who have the best knowledge about that part.
>
> Marco
>
> Am 12.01.2018 8:03 nachm. schrieb "Chris Olivier" <cjolivier01@gmail.com>:
>
> > -1 (binding)
> >
> > I totally understand the motivation for this (I've definitely saved
> myself
> > some grief by getting called out automatically for CMakeLists.txt stuff,
> > for example), but I respectfully decline for the following reason(s):
> >
> > I feel that defining code-owners has some negative effects.
> >
> > Other committers may be reluctant to start reviewing and approving PRs
> > since they aren't the one listed, so I feel this will in the long-run
> > reduce the number of people doing code reviews.
> >
> > If there aren't enough people doing PR's, then people can complain on
> dev@
> > asking for review.
> >
> > -Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Haibin Lin <haibin@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > On 2018-01-12 10:10, kellen sunderland <kellen.sunderland@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > On Jan 12, 2018 6:32 PM, "Steffen Rochel" <steffenrochel@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I propose to adopt the proposal.
> > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Steffen
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 8:39 PM Mu Li <muli.cmu@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Isabel,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My apologies that not saying that clearly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The purpose of this proposal is encouraging more contributors
to
> > help
> > > > > > review and merge PRs. And also hope to shorten the time for
a PR
> to
> > > be
> > > > > > merged. After assigning maintainers to modules, then PR
> > contributors
> > > can
> > > > > > easily contact the reviewers. In other words, github will
> > > automatically
> > > > > > assign the PR to the maintainer and send a notification email.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think I put the term "inbox" in my proposal. I never
> > > discussed
> > > > > PRs
> > > > > > with other contributors by sending email directly, which is
less
> > > > > effective
> > > > > > than just using github. I also don't aware any other contributor
> > use
> > > the
> > > > > > direct email way. So I didn't clarify it on the proposal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Isabel Drost-Fromm <
> > > isabel@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Am 9. Januar 2018 18:25:50 MEZ schrieb Mu Li <
> muli.cmu@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > > > > > >We should encourage to contract a specific contributor
for
> > issues
> > > and
> > > > > > > >PRs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My head translates "encourage to contact specific contributor"
> > into
> > > > > > > "encourage to contact specific contributors inbox". This
> > translated
> > > > > > version
> > > > > > > is what I would highly discourage.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See the disclaimer here for reasons behind that:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://home.apache.org/~hossman/#private_q
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Isabel
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9
Mail
> > > gesendet.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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