+1 Nice suggestion Alejandro! -- Thanks and Regards, Aravindan Vijayan
On 6/2/16, 11:31 PM, "Gautam Borad" <[email protected]> wrote: >+1 for Alejandro's suggestion for review groups. > >My +1 for github-based pull request process. Its way easy/simpler than >Review board and works well with a git-based workflow. >Also, we can expect new features every ><https://github.com/blog/2111-issue-and-pull-request-templates> now ><https://github.com/blog/2119-add-reactions-to-pull-requests-issues-and-comments> >and then <https://github.com/blog/2123-more-code-review-tools>! > >On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As I'm just newbie contributors, I'm happy to respect the Ambari project >> policy, but if we would want to consider to revisit review process, I'd +1 >> on Mithun. >> I just submitted two patches (may submit some more), and triggering Jenkins >> and submitting patch to review system was hurdle so that I was struggling >> several hours for that. >> And we can see the pull requests on Github mirror though project doesn't >> take pull request. It's well-known and easy way for open source >> contributors to participate. >> >> Thanks, >> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> >> 2016년 6월 3일 (금) 오전 10:58, Mithun Mathew <[email protected]>님이 작성: >> >> > Just putting some thoughts in regarding the review board model: >> > Every time (I mean EVERY TIME!), I have to copy a bunch of things that I >> > listed in the JIRA (summary, description, branch, JIRA no, group, and >> > upload the same patch) to the review board - to me it is quite a lot of >> > redundant work. >> > >> > The Github pull request model with CI kicking off as soon as pull request >> > is made is ideal and I consider this to be more efficient. >> > >> > Anyone else have similar thoughts? >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Alejandro Fernandez < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Thank you for the feedback. I created >> > > >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AMBARI/Code+Review+Guidelines >> > > as a starting point. >> > > I'm also looking into our workflow to see the pros/cons of switching to >> > > github + pull request model, or another code review provider with more >> > > advanced features. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Alejandro >> > > >> > > >> > > On 6/2/16, 2:02 PM, "Sumit Mohanty" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > > >We can look into the already available component names in the JIRA for >> > > >the initial list. >> > > >We should not create fine-grained groups and aim to have at least 3-5 >> > > >devs (more is better) in a single component/area. >> > > > >> > > >Possible list: >> > > >ambari-web >> > > >ambari-views >> > > >ambari-server >> > > >ambari-agent >> > > >stacks-framework/extensibility >> > > >stack-definitions (this could break into separate services) >> > > >blueprints >> > > >alerts/metrics >> > > >logsearch >> > > >security/kerberos/ldap >> > > >stack-upgrade/RU/EU >> > > > >> > > >Once the list is final lets make sure that the available list of >> > > >components in the JIRA matches this list. >> > > > >> > > >This is probably also a good opportunity to see if there are better >> > > >alternatives to reviews.apache.org. >> > > > >> > > >regards >> > > >Sumit >> > > >________________________________________ >> > > >From: Jayush Luniya <[email protected]> >> > > >Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 1:47 PM >> > > >To: [email protected] >> > > >Subject: Re: Code Review groups >> > > > >> > > >+1 on this >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >On 6/2/16, 1:44 PM, "Swapan Shridhar" <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> > > >>+1. Makes sense. >> > > >> >> > > >>Thanks. >> > > >> >> > > >>Regards, >> > > >>Swapan. >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >>On 6/2/16, 1:27 PM, "Robert Levas" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >>>Alejandro, I agree. I just hope we (as a group) can manage the wiki >> > > >>>page without letting it get too stale over time. >> > > >>> >> > > >>>+1 >> > > >>> >> > > >>>Rob >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>>On 6/2/16, 12:55 PM, "Alejandro Fernandez" < >> > [email protected]> >> > > >>>wrote: >> > > >>> >> > > >>>>Hi committers and contributors, >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>I'm sure most of you have ran into this before; whenever I submit a >> > > >>>>code review I'm always curious to find out which reviewers I should >> > > >>>>include that are knowledgeable in that area. >> > > >>>>So I'll typically run git blame to find the last 2-3 people that >> > worked >> > > >>>>on those files, which takes time and may include reviewers no >> longer >> > > >>>>interested in that code area or miss reviewers that are interested. >> > > >>>>I want to propose a wiki where developers sign up to be reviewers >> > for a >> > > >>>>particular section, could be a feature, directory, etc. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>Thoughts? >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>This allows developers to opt-in to areas of interest (even outside >> > of >> > > >>>>their current expertise), should produce better code reviews, and >> > make >> > > >>>>it easier for new contributors to find the right people. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>Thank you, >> > > >>>>Alejandro Fernandez >> > > >>>> >> > > >>> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > *Mithun Mathew* (Matt) >> > >> > - www.linkedin.com/in/mithunmatt/ >> > >> > > > >-- >Regards, >Gautam.
