Thank you, everyone. From our discussions, it appears that there is a general consensus on centralizing the archiving of CIPs within Confluence for efficient management. However, opinions diverge on the approach to commenting and discussing these CIPs. Xintong has shared valuable insights from existing Apache projects, which integrate Confluence usage with email lists for efficient tracking of discussions. I believe this approach suits us as well.
However, A problem emerged when someone without a Confluence account tried to create a CIP within the Celeborn namespace on Confluence (thanks to Aravind for pointing out this problem). The issue stems from cwiki.apache.org's current policy that restricts new user registrations and permits access solely to Apache committers. Consequently, relying on Confluence for CIP drafting proves inconvenient for all contributors. In light of this, after discussions among PMC members, we adjust our CIP process. Our new plan involves utilizing alternative documentation tools, such as Google Docs, for drafting CIPs. Subsequently, discussions relevant to these CIPs will take place via our mailing lists. Finally, the responsibility falls to Celeborn's PMC members and Committers to ensure the appropriate archiving of the finalized CIPs within Confluence. More details about the CIP process can be found in CIP[1]. [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CELEBORN/Celeborn+Improvement+Proposals Thanks, Jiashu Xiong Xintong Song <[email protected]> 于2024年5月30日周四 13:07写道： > In fact, Confluence does support inline comments. > > However, AFAIK communities that adopt Confluence-based proposal management > (e.g., Flink[1] / Paimon[2] / Kafka[3]) usually encourage discussions to > happen on the mailing list. > > IMHO, discussions in mailing lists are easier to track compared to inline > comments. People don't need to subscribe to notifications of individual > documents in order to receive updates on changes. For people who joined the > discussion late or revisit the discussion later, the mailing thread also > makes it easy to understand how the entire conversation has taken place. > Most importantly, discussions are better kept in one place rather than > separated in multiple places. > > Best, > > Xintong > > > [1] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals > > [2] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PAIMON/Paimon+Improvement+Proposals > > [3] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Improvement+Proposals > > > Best, > > Xintong > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 12:33 PM Nicholas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Jiashu, > > > > > > > > > > +1 for me. According to my experience in the Flink community, the > > discussion of the CIP is commented in dev maillist instead of commented > in > > confluence. > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, the CIP is required to introduce new feature or major changes. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Nicholas Jiang > > > > > > > > > > At 2024-05-30 01:29:58, "Mridul Muralidharan" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Inline comments, discussions are invaluable for design docs - this is > > not > > >yet supported in confluence right ? > > >Another option would be to iterate and discuss through other means (like > > >google docs), and before vote, move it to the wiki - so that the > community > > >is deciding/voting on artifacts which are on the wiki. > > >This would also help in case proposals do not end up making it to the > vote > > >stage, but go through brainstorming/discussion - and evolve into > something > > >new (or get merged with others). > > > > > >Regards, > > >Mridul > > > > > > > > >On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:42 AM Keyong Zhou <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> +1 for me. > > >> > > >> About the comments by Cheng, IMHO discussing in maillist is also > > acceptable > > >> (and even better) > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Keyong Zhou > > >> > > >> Cheng Pan <[email protected]> 于2024年5月29日周三 14:32写道： > > >> > > >> > +1 for archiving proposals on confluence. > > >> > > > >> > Does Confluence support inline comments like Google Docs does? I > think > > >> > it’s a convincing functionality for the discussion period. > > >> > > > >> > Thanks, > > >> > Cheng Pan > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On May 29, 2024, at 11:19, rexxiong <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > Hello, Celeborn community, > > >> > > > > >> > > In the past, when Celeborn introduced new major features or > > significant > > >> > changes, we typically used Google Docs to launch proposals. > However, a > > >> > major issue with Google Docs is the difficulty in centrally managing > > >> these > > >> > proposals. Therefore, after referring to other communities and based > > on > > >> > discussions with several PMCs offline, it appears that Apache > > Confluence > > >> > could be a viable alternative for our needs. With that in mind, I > > would > > >> > like to invite all of you to share your thoughts, experiences, and > > >> > preferences regarding the use of Apache Confluence versus Google > Docs > > for > > >> > our proposal management. Your feedback will be invaluable in helping > > us > > >> > make an informed decision that best meets the needs of our > community. > > >> > > > > >> > > Meanwhile, I have archived previous proposals and written the > > Celeborn > > >> > Improvement Proposal (CIP) process on Confluence. > > >> > > > > >> > > What do you think? Looking forward to your thoughts on this > > proposal. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > >> > > Jiashu Xiong > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
