My 2 cents: I hope Vladimir realizes that there is a small community of developers who understand query optimizers and are willing to contribute to it. Its a complex area and he cannot do it alone. His constructive comments are welcome but not the arrogance/mockery in the code review. Those will absolutely have a negative effect on the health of the project. We need contributors like Zoltan ! In the PR Jesus suggested to file a follow-up JIRA and move on. I don't understand why that's not acceptable to Vladimir.
thanks, Aman On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 4:07 AM Zoltan Haindrich <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 10/19/18 3:27 AM, Albert wrote: > > maybe Zoltan could share his feel on that review, and Vladimir could act > > correspondingly. > > During the review process Vladimir had some good points; I tried to focus > on those - and tried to overlook he's style - it kinda worked well to just > see the value in his > comments - although he never acknowledge any of my concerns - I was not > against those modifications. > At the end of that process I was adding assertion messages - I thinked the > core part of the patch have made it thru the review :) > A day have passed without any comments... after it got in that > conversation on the "commit" started...I tried to give my best explanations > - but when that comment came > about thumblr: that blow the fuse out...I've written some long message > about why are we here - but eventually I've cleared most of it; except the > last few words. > > I'm not sure what Vladimir's goal with he's behaviour, but this thing > kinda take away my willingness to file another ticket... > > regards, > Zoltan > > > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 8:23 AM Ashutosh Chauhan <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I have not contributed to Calcite in a while but I keep up with whats > going > >> in project and actively follow mailing list and jiras of interest. > >> I concur with Josh that it is public shaming and bullying. This is not > >> acceptable. Also, this is not an exception but pattern which tells me > that > >> it will continue in future too. > >> This is not in line with ASF code of conduct and respectful dialog > expected > >> in community. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Ashutosh > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:24 PM Michael Mior <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> You can see that I already responded to the comment and I don't really > >> have > >>> many further thoughts. I do agree though that it's true that this could > >>> have been intended humorously and my reaction didn't acknowledge that. > >> That > >>> said, it's of course worth considering with comments intended to be > >>> humorous how they will be perceived. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Michael Mior > >>> [email protected] > >>> > >>> > >>> Le jeu. 18 oct. 2018 à 15:37, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> a écrit : > >>> > >>>> I’m not too concerned about the "Do you aim to get an entry in > >>>> accidentallyquadratic?” comment — it could be interpreted humorously, > >> if > >>> it > >>>> were not at a end of a long, contentious review thread. > >>>> > >>>> I am more concerned that it was a long contentious review thread. The > >>>> problem is that Vladimir is dogmatic. He makes a point, that point is > >>>> acknowledged by the other party, but he absolutely refuses to give > >>> ground. > >>>> This occurs on the issue of messages for assert statements, and on the > >>>> issue of the O(n ^ 2) performance of the algorithm. > >>>> > >>>> There is no path to consensus, other than yielding to Vladimir. > >>>> > >>>> I have experienced this behavior also. I had fixed a bug — the > >> expression > >>>> “TRUE IS FALSE” was being simplified to TRUE — and Vladimir vetoed my > >> fix > >>>> on the “technical grounds” that I had added tests without sufficient > >>> error > >>>> messages. The veto left me absolutely furious, and I seriously > >> considered > >>>> leaving the community. I surmise that other people who are on the > >>> receiving > >>>> end of his criticism may feel the same way. > >>>> > >>>> I appreciate Vladimir’s efforts reviewing code, and I appreciate his > >> high > >>>> standards, but he needs to change his communication style. > >>>> > >>>> Perhaps it would be useful if we discuss under what circumstances a > >>>> committer can veto a change. ASF policy [1] says the following: > >>>> > >>>>> Votes on code modifications follow a different model. In > >>>>> this scenario, a negative vote constitutes a veto, which > >>>>> cannot be overridden. > >>>> > >>>>> If the R-T-C policy is in effect, a positive vote carries the > >>>>> very strong implied message, 'I have tested this patch > >>>>> myself, and found it good.' Similarly, a negative vote > >>>>> usually means that the patch was tested and found to > >>>>> be not -good, although the veto (for such it is in this > >>>>> case) may be based on other technical grounds. > >>>> > >>>> I think we need to clarify what “technical grounds" means. Introducing > >> a > >>>> security hole would certainly qualify. As would introducing a bug in > >>>> user-visible functionality (if the same change were not removing a > more > >>>> serious bug). But in less clear-cut cases, where the purported > >> “technical > >>>> grounds” are disputed or subjective, I think a consensus of other > >>>> committers should override a veto. > >>>> > >>>> To be clear, the “technical grounds” veto is very important. But if > the > >>>> threat of it is preventing consensus building, we need to look at it > >>>> carefully. Removing the veto threat forces reviewers build consensus, > >> to > >>>> persuade rather than cajole; it reduces the power of committers over > >>>> non-committers, and encourages us to treat each other as equals. > >>>> > >>>> The commit veto is the “nuclear option” and I, for one, hope that it > is > >>>> never used again in this project. > >>>> > >>>> Julian > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html < > >>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Oct 18, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez < > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Is it OK for a PMC member of this community to engage with a new > >>>> contributor to the project in this way? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/b470a0cd4572c9f6c4c0e9b51926b97c5af58d3f#r30950660 > >>>>> > >>>>> I wanted to bring everyone´s attention to the issue because I do not > >>>> believe this behavior contributes to the health of the project, > >> welcoming > >>>> new contributions, etc. The same could have been said in a very > >> different > >>>> way, and I do not think Zoltan was engaging disrespectfully. > >>>>> > >>>>> I am not sure whether I am overreacting, I would like to hear others > >>>> opinion. Does anyone else in the PMC find this disturbing? Does the > ASF > >>>> provide clear guidelines about how members of a community should > engage > >>>> with each other? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Jesús > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > >
