+1 Perfect! On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 6:15 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> wrote:
> What do you think ? https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10176 (I > pinned it) > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:10 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > wrote: > > > I love the idea with Pinned Issue keeping "current initiatives". > > > > TL;DR; Summarizing the current proposal > > > > * We keep pretty much everything in labelled Github Issues (including > > "meta" issues) > > * We disable back Wiki in Github > > * We have a pinned issue with "Current Initiatives" linked > > * We cleanup CWiki move it/remove outdated info and the only thing that > > stays there, for now, are: > > * "Announcements" (which we might later move to airflow.apache.org) > > * Process description for Airflow 2.0 > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+2.0+-+Planning > > * AIPs > > > > If everyone is happy with this approach I am happy to make it happen :). > > > > J. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:35 PM Kamil Breguła <kamil.breg...@polidea.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> 1. I do not see a problem. Issues may have a prefix in the title, which > >> will allow us to easily find them. > >> > >> Release - Airflow 2.0 > >> Release - Airflow 1.10 > >> AIP-32 - API > >> AIP-XXX - Docker Image/Helm Chart > >> AIP-XXX - XXXX > >> > >> However, I do not mind using labels in this case. > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/labels/AIP-31 > >> > >> 2. I think we can use the pinned issues. This will allow you to find > them > >> easily because they will be closer to the tickets. > >> > >> > https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/pinning-an-issue-to-your-repository > >> > >> This feature has a significant limitation as we can only pin 3 issues, > but > >> I think we can benefit from it as it will be easy to stay organized. To > >> overcome this limitation, one of the items may be indexed with the > >> currently running projects. For now, I've pinned an issue with Airflow > >> 2.0 > >> release info so we can see what it looks like. When we like it, we can > >> create an index and pin it. I think it will be much newer friendly than > >> WIKI. WDYT? > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Kamil > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> . > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:49 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > I think it describes very well what we discussed so far. I have two > >> points > >> > to add: > >> > > >> > 1) Using Milestone: > >> > > >> > I prefer to keep milestones to only mark stuff for global releases of > >> > Airflow and nothing else. If we use Milestones for SIG groups this > will > >> > become unmanageable (and I know Milestones are used by the release > >> > management scripts to verify if everything marked for release is > already > >> > merged). > >> > > >> > 2) CWiki vs. Github Wiki and Index of "Currently running Airflow > >> > initiatives" > >> > > >> > Another thing that I wanted to add is whether we use both wikis (or > one > >> > only) after cleanup I proposed. > >> > I think CWiki is better for design docs/discussions etc. - it has > >> diagram > >> > support built-in and a few other features that make it easier to have > >> > better "design" discussion. Github Wiki is very poor. > >> > I agree that Github issues are great for most of the stuff. But I > think > >> we > >> > could use Github Wiki to keep index with links to the issues + one > >> sentence > >> > of explanation for those more "permanent" and long-running "meta" > >> > issues.I'd call it "Currently running Airflow initiatives": > >> > > >> > What I can see there currently is: > >> > > >> > * Airflow 2.0 Progress > >> > * Backport Release 2nd wave > >> > * Quarantine Issues (master, v1-10-test, v1-10-stable) > >> > * Refactors and cleanups > >> > * Pylint > >> > * MyPy > >> > * ... > >> > * SIG Groups > >> > * link to meta-issue for each SIG Group > >> > > >> > This would be a great point for newcomers to have a look of what's > >> going on > >> > currently in Airflow without having to look at 500 issues. It might be > >> > obvious for more seasoned committers that those initiatives are in > >> progress > >> > but you would not know that before you go into details of individual > >> "meta" > >> > issues (and you'd have to know that there are those meta issues in the > >> > first place). i think it's much more discoverable if we just have one > >> page > >> > in Github Wiki with those. > >> > > >> > WDYT? > >> > > >> > J. > >> > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > Jarek Potiuk > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > > > > > > -- > > Jarek Potiuk > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> >
