Thanks for your comments Julian! I would like to clarify that the new state is certainly not an obligation for people to follow (as it is not an obligation for somebody to mark the Jira as "IN PROGRESS").
Moreover, I was not thinking that somebody assigns cases to people but rather that people will kindly propose themselves to help fulfilling the release. Selecting in advance which cases somebody will review may turn out to be a good idea as it was the preselection of release managers. Concretely, I would like to have an extra state to be able to establish Jira filters/views for doing the following. As a reviewer: * identify which cases are not in review by somebody else, and choose among them which I want to solve for the next release; * list all the cases that remain to be reviewed by me and visualise relevant information concerning the state of the review. As a release manager: * monitor the overall progress of the release (10% IN PROGRESS, 20% IN REVIEW, 70% RESOLVED) and anticipate when the release will be ready; * identify which cases are not in review and try to find volunteers for these cases; * foresee which cases are going to make it in the release (those with a reviewer) to better invest my effort. * identify which cases have been resolved without a review and react if the change As a PMC member: * gather additional statistics of people really helping the project by performing reviews which counts for getting the status of committer/PMC. Often I become a picky guy so maybe the above are not that important; I certainly don't want to make the life of people more difficult. On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 7:47 PM Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote: > I don’t think another state is necessary/helpful. It seems like more > process, when what we are suffering is lack of resources, not lack of > process. > > I do believe that it is helpful to add a comment when I am reviewing - see > e.g. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3183 < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3183>. And when I get > distracted (which I often do), the contributor can ping me a few days later > and say “hey, how’s the review going?”. > > We’re not very good at assigning reviewers to cases. Everyone is a > volunteer, so we don’t assign reviewers, we leave it to people to assign > themselves as reviewer. If a new state would help with that problem I could > be convinced to support it. > > Julian > > > > On Jul 15, 2019, at 8:39 AM, Stamatis Zampetakis <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I was thinking that it would be helpful if we had an additional JIRA > state > > stating that the ticket is under ongoing review. > > > > It would help to better monitor progress and provide more insights > towards > > the release. > > > > Having an assigned reviewer (most often a committer) would mean that this > > person is going to help resolving the ticket for the next release (or > find > > somebody else to delegate this task). That doesn't mean that other people > > should not participate in the discussion, however if things block he/she > > should be the first person to take action. > > > > What do you think? > > > > If there are not any objections, I will create an INFRA ticket. > > > > Best, > > Stamatis > >
