I like the subject Etienne has brought up, and will give it a number in this list :-)
6. Have more technical reference docs (not just workspace set up) for contributors. I think this overlaps a lot with a prior discussion about where to collect design proposals [1]. Design docs used to be just dropped into a public folder, but that got disorganized. And that thread was about work in progress, so JIRA was a good place for details after a dev@ thread agrees on a proposal. At this point, the designs are pretty solid conceptually or even implemented and we could start to build out deeper technical bits on the web site, or at least some place that people can find it. We do have the Testing Guide and the PTransform Style Guide and somewhere near there we could have deeper references. I think we need a broader vision for the "table of contents" here. For my docs (triggers, lateness, runner API, side inputs, state, coders) I haven't had time, but I do intend to both translate from GDoc to some other format and also rewrite versions for users where appropriate. Probably this will mean coming up with that table of contents. Kenn [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/%3c6bc60c88-cf91-4fff-eae6-fea6ee06f...@nanthrax.net%3E On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Neelesh Salian <neeleshssal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Agreed. I have some old JIRAs that I am cleaning up. > > Thank you for bringing this up. > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > Same also for Slack, github comments, etc. > > > > From a Apache perspective, it should happen on the mailing list, > > eventually referencing a central wiki/faq/whatever. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > > > On 04/24/2017 06:23 PM, Mingmin Xu wrote: > > > >> many design documents are mixed in maillist, jira comments, it would be > a > >> big help to put them in a centralized list. Also I would expect more > >> wiki/blogs to provide in-depth analysis, like the translation from > >> pipeline > >> to runner specified topology, window/trigger implementation. Without > these > >> knowledge, it's hard to touch the core concepts. > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > >> wrote: > >> > >> Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to > >>> maintain ;) > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> JB > >>> > >>> > >>> On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi JB, > >>>> > >>>> I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE > setup. > >>>> The FAQ > >>>> could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a source, > >>>> how > >>>> do I > >>>> use it to implement an IO" > >>>> > >>>> Etienne > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > >>>> > >>>> Hi Etienne, > >>>>> > >>>>> What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the > >>>>> IntelliJ > >>>>> and > >>>>> Eclipse setup sections. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards > >>>>> JB > >>>>> > >>>>> On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I might suggest another good to have: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some > >>>>>> sort of > >>>>>> programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to > >>>>>> sdk/runner/io/... > >>>>>> writers. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google > >>>>>> drive, the > >>>>>> ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe having > >>>>>> key points > >>>>>> in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for > >>>>>> example) > >>>>>> would be > >>>>>> interesting. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Etienne > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Good idea for domain of interest/concept. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>> JB > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest, > >>>>>>>> concept > >>>>>>>> and if it's a good "first bug". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not > actively > >>>>>>>>>> working on. > >>>>>>>>>> 2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets > >>>>>>>>>> descriptions and raising concerns. > >>>>>>>>>> 3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). > >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps > >>>>>>>>>> some can be closed. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in > >>>>>>>>> tracking > >>>>>>>>> issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues > than > >>>>>>>>> opened > >>>>>>>>> in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more > opened > >>>>>>>>> than > >>>>>>>>> resolved. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, > the > >>>>>>>>> Jira is > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> automatically assigned to the Jira component leader. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. > >>>>>>>>> It > >>>>>>>>> wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance > >>>>>>>>> somebody > >>>>>>>>> will actually help. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, > etc. > >>>>>>>>> -- but > >>>>>>>>> that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of > a > >>>>>>>>> lot of > >>>>>>>>> issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more > >>>>>>>>> unassigned > >>>>>>>>> issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just > sets > >>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>> community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does > >>>>>>>>> help move > >>>>>>>>> things along! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I think a better approach of addressing the current state would > be > >>>>>>>>> increase > >>>>>>>>> the number of components / component leads. With more people > >>>>>>>>> involved and > >>>>>>>>> lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> -- > >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >>> jbono...@apache.org > >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net > >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > -- > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > jbono...@apache.org > > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Neelesh S. Salian >
