mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Discussion] Recognise Reviewers, Besides Committers and PMC
Date Tue, 23 Oct 2018 15:17:34 GMT
It's not my intent to kill this (I just asked a question).  What are
mentors' input?

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:50 PM Tianqi Chen <tqchen@apache.org> wrote:

> To be clear, we are not splitting the committers into reviewers, we are
> recognizing an additional set of contributors who could become potential
> committers and recognizing them as committers
>
> Tianqi
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:23 PM Chris Olivier <cjolivier01@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Are there any other major Apache projects which have this designation?  I
> > am always continually suspicious of efforts to reinvent Apache rules from
> > other non-Apache projects, when Apache projects have historically been
> > quite successful within the Apache platform.  In fact, operating outside
> of
> > Apache norms is already a major problem as everyone knows.  We are only
> > just now splitting Committer/PMC into two separate groups. Splitting into
> > three seems a bit much at this juncture unless there's some good
> > precedents.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 2:17 PM Tianqi Chen <tqchen@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The situation most projects are facing(including us), is lack of code
> > > reviews. Code reviews are the most important part of the project, and
> > > high-quality reviews are extremely time-consuming, maybe as much as so
> > > as the code itself. Usually, it is only committers do the code reviews,
> > the
> > > code reviews from committers are important, as they are the serve as
> > > the gate-keeper of the quality of the code.  In my experience, I
> > > usually find the reviews from non-committer super helpful, and they
> > > help the committer to catch problems that are otherwise overlooked.
> > >
> > > However, it is very hard to get contributors to do code reviews unless
> we
> > > solicit them. It is definitely harder than getting code contributions.
> > The
> > > Reviewer mechanism could provide a way to do so. We can recognize
> > > contributors, bring them as reviewers and encourage them to do the code
> > > reviews by explicitly soliciting. The reviewers can learn from the
> > > committer reviews,
> > > which serves as a role model for what is being expected. Naturally,
> this
> > > likely helps us find more good reviewers and bought them committer.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Tianqi
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 1:09 PM Anirudh <anirudh2290@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > -1. I dont see the need for additional level of hierarchy. I totally
> am
> > > for
> > > > recognizing good code reviewers. We can recognize this by making them
> > > > committers. Being a good reviewer should be sufficient to become a
> > > > committer in my opinion. (Assuming that there is a seperation between
> > > PPMC
> > > > and committers).
> > > >
> > > > Anirudh
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 8:28 AM Qing Lan <lanking520@live.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > > Let's have a reviewer list somewhere with a certain format: such
as
> > > C++,
> > > > > Gluon, Scala/Java based on language or some other category. etc.
In
> > the
> > > > > future, label bot would automatically assign reviewers based on
> this
> > > kind
> > > > > of documentation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Qing
> > > > >
> > > > > ´╗┐On 10/21/18, 11:44 PM, "YiZhi Liu" <eazhi.liu@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >     +1
> > > > >     I also suggest add reviewer list link to the PR template, so
> that
> > > > >     developers can easily request review from those reviewers.
> > > > >     On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 8:30 PM Tianqi Chen <tqchen@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >     >
> > > > >     > I was suggesting something more concrete:
> > > > >     >
> > > > >     > - Add a Reviewers section to
> > > > >     >
> > > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/CONTRIBUTORS.md
> > > to
> > > > >     > list a list of Reviewers.
> > > > >     >     - This is a "pesudo role", but holds weight as committers
> > > > should
> > > > > highly
> > > > >     > value their reviews during the PR process.
> > > > >     > - The committers/PMC could actively look for good
> contributors
> > > and
> > > > > nominate
> > > > >     > them as Reviewer.
> > > > >     > - Contributors are encouraged to seek reviews from the list
> of
> > > > > reviewers.
> > > > >     > - The committers should actively solicit code reviews from
> the
> > > > > reviewers
> > > > >     > when reviewing PRs and take their reviews into serious
> > > > consideration.
> > > > >     >
> > > > >     > - PMCs should actively look for new committers in the current
> > > > > Reviewers
> > > > >     >    - Notably, the history reviews plus contribution likely
> will
> > > > > provide a
> > > > >     > good indication on whether the person can uphold the quality
> > > > > standard of
> > > > >     > the codebase, and provide helpful feedbacks(which is the
> trait
> > > that
> > > > > needed
> > > > >     > from committer to merge code)
> > > > >     >
> > > > >     > Tianqi
> > > > >     >
> > > > >     >
> > > > >     > On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 5:13 PM Steffen Rochel <
> > > > > steffenrochel@gmail.com>
> > > > >     > wrote:
> > > > >     >
> > > > >     > > +1
> > > > >     > > With the release announcement for MXNet 1.3 all
> contributors
> > > > incl.
> > > > > code
> > > > >     > > reviewers have been recognized. I suggest all future
> release
> > > > > announcements
> > > > >     > > should include such recognition. Are you suggesting
to
> > > highlight
> > > > > most
> > > > >     > > active reviewers in release announcement or regularly
(e.g.
> > > > > monthly),
> > > > >     > > specifically from non-committers?
> > > > >     > >
> > > > >     > > On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 10:11 AM Tianqi Chen <
> > > tqchen@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >     > >
> > > > >     > > > Also re another email-thread(I sent out one with
my
> > > > > institutional email
> > > > >     > > > which get blocked initially, so this one was a
bit
> > > duplication
> > > > > of that).
> > > > >     > > I
> > > > >     > > > think it should really be the job of committers
to
> > recognize
> > > > > potential
> > > > >     > > > reviewers, github also makes it easier to do so,
e.g.
> > > > >     > > >
> > > > >     > > >
> > > > >     > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=reviewed-by%3Apiiswrong
> > > > >     > > >
> > > > >     > > > Tianqi
> > > > >     > > >
> > > > >     > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 12:05 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > >     > > wrote:
> > > > >     > > >
> > > > >     > > > > +1 Great idea. Adding a name to the contributor
list
> is a
> > > > good
> > > > > idea.
> > > > >     > > > Also,
> > > > >     > > > > I've found that thanking the person for the
review on
> the
> > > PR
> > > > > is another
> > > > >     > > > way
> > > > >     > > > > to express gratitude for their time and effort.
> > > > >     > > > >
> > > > >     > > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:51 PM Tianqi Chen
<
> > > > tqchen@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >     > > > >
> > > > >     > > > > > Dear MXNet Community:
> > > > >     > > > > >
> > > > >     > > > > > There is a great discussion going on
in terms of
> > lowering
> > > > > the barrier
> > > > >     > > > of
> > > > >     > > > > > entries and encourage more contribution
to the
> project.
> > > > One
> > > > > of the
> > > > >     > > > > general
> > > > >     > > > > > goals is to encourage a broader pool
of
> contributions.
> > I
> > > > > want to make
> > > > >     > > > the
> > > > >     > > > > > following proposal:
> > > > >     > > > > >
> > > > >     > > > > > Besides Committers and PMC, let us also
recognize
> > > Reviewers
> > > > > in the
> > > > >     > > > > > community.  This is a "pseudo role"
as there is no
> such
> > > > > official role
> > > > >     > > > in
> > > > >     > > > > > Apache. But I want to explore the possibility
of
> > > > recognizing
> > > > > active
> > > > >     > > > > > reviewers for example, by adding a list
of names in
> the
> > > > > contributor
> > > > >     > > > list.
> > > > >     > > > > > In general, I find it is really helpful
to have more
> > code
> > > > > reviews.
> > > > >     > > > > > Recognizing good reviewers early enables
us to find
> > > > committer
> > > > >     > > > candidates,
> > > > >     > > > > > and encourage them to contribute and
understand what
> is
> > > the
> > > > > bar of
> > > > >     > > code
> > > > >     > > > > > quality that is required to merge the
code.
> > > > >     > > > > >
> > > > >     > > > > > This can provide the community with
more evidence
> when
> > > > > recruiting new
> > > > >     > > > > > committers. After all the write access
of
> committership
> > > is
> > > > > about to
> > > > >     > > the
> > > > >     > > > > > code and understand the consequence
of the
> > responsibility
> > > > --
> > > > > which is
> > > > >     > > > > > usually can be found in high-quality
review history.
> > > > >     > > > > >
> > > > >     > > > > > Please let me know what you think.
> > > > >     > > > > >
> > > > >     > > > > > Tianqi
> > > > >     > > > > >
> > > > >     > > > >
> > > > >     > > >
> > > > >     > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >     --
> > > > >     Yizhi Liu
> > > > >     DMLC member
> > > > >     Amazon Web Services
> > > > >     Vancouver, Canada
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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