What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that
outlines what this would enable?
In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers
to close PR's, assign labels and such.
This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually.
On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote:
Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding links to
talks or slides left open for months.
I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and that
migration looks to be satisfactory.
On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions
Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in
the current infrastructure.
Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet.
Cheers
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote:
All,
ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos)
GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links
committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by
contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring
INFRA tickets.
I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues,
and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has
recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating
Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected
contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for
the future sub-projects).
[0] https://gitbox.apache.org/
[1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls
[2]
http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-
GitBox-tp21160p21497.html
Greg
