Sure it's a pity than this PR got unnoticed and I think it is a combination of factors (PR date around Christmas, the fact that the author forgot - AFAIK - to ping a reviewer in either the PR or the ML). I agree with Rui's proposal to enhance visibility of the "how to get a reviewed" process. IMHO, I don't think committers spend time watching new PRs coming up, but they more likely act when pinged. So, we may need some automation in case a contributor do not use github reviewed proposal. Auto reviewer assignment seem too much but modifying the PR template to add a sentence such as "please pickup a reviewer in the proposed list" could be enough. WDYT ?
Also, I started to review the PR on Friday (thx Kenn for pinging me). Etienne Le vendredi 25 janvier 2019 à 10:21 -0800, Rui Wang a écrit : > We have code contribution guidelines [1] and it says useful tips to make PR > reviewed and merged. But I guess it hides > in Beam website so new contributors are likely to ignore it. In order to make > the guidance easy to find and read for > new contributors, we probably can > > a. Move number 5 item from [1] to a separate section and name it "Tips to get > your PR reviewed and merged" > b. Put the link to the Github pull request template, so when a contributor > creates the first PR, the contributor could > see the link (or even paste text from contribution guide). It will be a good > chance that new contributors read what's > in pull request template. > > > -Rui > > [1] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#make-your-change > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 9:24 AM Alexey Romanenko <aromanenko....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > For sure, it’s a pity that this PR has not been addressed for a long time > > (I guess, we probably have other ones like > > this) but, as I can see from this PR history, review has not been requested > > explicitly by author (and this is one of > > the our recommendations for code contribution [1]). > > What are the options to improve this: > > > > 1) Make it more clearly for new contributors that they need to ask for a > > review explicitly (with a help of > > recommendations that already provided in top-right corner on PR page) > > 2) Create a bot (like “stale” bot that we have) to check for non-addressed > > PRs that are more than, say, 7 days, and > > send notification to dev@ (or dedicated, see n.3) mailing list if they are > > starving for review. > > 3) (Optionally) Create new mailing list called pr@ for new coming and > > non-addressed PRs > > > > [1] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#make-your-change > > > > > > > On 25 Jan 2019, at 17:50, Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > The fact that this happened is a real pity. However it is clearly an > > > exception and not the rule. Really few PRs have been long time without > > > review. Can we somehow automatically send a notification if a PR has > > > no assigned reviewers, or if it has not been reviewed after some time > > > as Tim suggested? > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 9:43 AM Tim Robertson <timrobertson...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > Thanks Kenn > > > > > > > > I tend to think that timing is the main contributing factor as you note > > > > on the Jira - it slipped down with no > > > > reminders / bumps sent on any channels that I can see. > > > > > > > > Would something that alerts the dev@ list of PRs that have not received > > > > any attention after N days be helpful > > > > perhaps? > > > > Even if that only prompts action by one of us to comment on the PR that > > > > it's been acknowledged would likely be > > > > enough to engage the contributor - they would hopefully then ping the > > > > individual if it then slips for a long > > > > time. > > > > > > > > Next week will be my first I'll be able to work on Beam in 2019, but > > > > I'll comment on that PR now too as it's > > > > missing tests. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 7:27 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > The subject line is a quote from BEAM-6324* > > > > > > > > > > This makes me sad. I hope/expect it is a failure to route a pull > > > > > request to the right reviewer. I am less sad > > > > > about the functionality than the sentiment and how a contributor is > > > > > being discouraged. > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have ideas that could help? > > > > > > > > > > Kenn > > > > > > > > > > *https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6324
