I just want to give a little more context to this….  I’ve been lurking on this 
list for several months now reading everything that’s going on.   From Apache’s 
standpoint, that should be a “very good start” for getting to know what is 
happening in a project.   

On my last PR, Eugene commented about using the AutoValue pattern for part of 
it which caught me off guard.   None of the other IO’s in master were using it, 
there wasn’t any discussion on this list about it, I had no idea what it was 
about.   So I asked JB to make sure I hadn’t missed anything.  

Anyway, this is one of the main concerns I have with Beam’s PR work flow, I 
feel I’m missing things as there is significant amount of things not happening 
on a list.   The initial pull request is going to the commits list (ok, would 
prefer the dev list, but at least its on a list).  However, none of the 
comments or discussions or anything that is occurring as part of the review is 
making it to any list.   The only people that “learn” from the reviews are the 
reviewers and the person who initiated the PR unless they go into each and 
every PR and read the comments (and find the news ones and such).    With my 
Apache hat on, this bothers me.    As another example, the comments on PR1003 
are very applicable to anyone looking into writing IO’s and they could learn 
about some of the “best practices” presented there.      Anyway, I don’t really 
understand why the full github integration wasn’t setup for the beam PR’s so 
that the comments would come back to the lists as well (and JIRA, BTW).

That’s basically the background as to why JB sent this.  I was confused and 
bugged him.   :-)

Dan



> On Oct 5, 2016, at 1:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi team,
> 
> I would like to excuse myself to have forgotten to discuss and share with you 
> a technical point and generally speaking do a small reminder.
> 
> When we work with Eugene on the JdbcIO, we experimented AutoValue to deal 
> with IO configuration. AutoValue provides a nice way to reduce and limit the 
> boilerplate code required by the IO configuration.
> We used AutoValue in JdbcIO and, regarding the good improvements we saw, we 
> started to refactor the other IOs.
> 
> The use of AutoValue should have been notice and discussed on the mailing 
> list.
> 
> "If it doesn't exist on the mailing list, it doesn't exist at all."
> 
> So, any comment happening on a GitHub pull request, or discussion on hangouts 
> which can impact the project (generally speaking) has to happen on the 
> mailing list.
> 
> It provides project transparency and facilitates the new contribution 
> onboarding.
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 

-- 
Daniel Kulp
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> - http://dankulp.com/blog 
<http://dankulp.com/blog>
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com <http://coders.talend.com/>

Reply via email to