Hi David, I know finding a meeting time will be very hard; I am on the East coast of the US.
Do you mean 11:30 AM or PM? (I assume AM.). If there are others in the US, we can work async or maybe there could be separate meetings for different goals. In case I cannot attend, I'd like to suggest that one focus could be improving the build time. If we reduce the build time first, it should make committing other changes faster/easier. Separately, if we could find some ways to prevent flaky tests from outright failing the build, that would also speed up the process of contributing. Cheers, Jim On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 5:51 PM David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > I would like to have a kickoff meeting this week for us all to meet. > > In general, I would like these meeting to be working meetings. But for > this first meeting I would like to discuss and agree: > > > > * Goals > * Metrics > * Ongoing meeting structure and timing > > I will collate any material from before the meeting on these areas and > briefly present so we can discuss. > > We have a lot of people in Europe and India, who have expressed an > interest. This first meeting will be on > > Thursday 14th of November 11:30 GMT for 30 minutes. I will advise on the > web link in a later email. > > I hope this works for everyone / most people, let me know if there are any > issues, > Kind regards, David. > > From: Nic Townsend <nictowns...@uk.ibm.com> > Date: Thursday, 7 November 2024 at 17:26 > To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Flink technical debt. > Hi Robert, David > > I am very much interested in a backlog review call – personally for two > reasons: > > > 1. Learning a bit more about the state of Flink, understanding how each > issue would be triaged (and understanding what/why the severity is) > 2. Seeing if there are any obvious places that I can help, it’s often > easier for me hearing people describe the problem > > -- > > Nic Townsend > IBM Event Processing > Senior Engineer / Technical Lead > > Slack: @nictownsend > > > > From: Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > Date: Wednesday, 6 November 2024 at 15:22 > To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Flink technical debt. > Hey David, > > Thanks a lot for this initiative. > What do you think about setting up a call weekly or every second week, open > to the public, where we collaboratively review a backlog of Jira tickets > and triage them into: > - Closing, > - following up, > - assigning a committer owner? > > The purpose of the call is not to hide anything from anybody, it is just > for quicker collaboration. All decisions from the calls need to end up in > Jira and on the mailing lists > > > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 4:07 PM David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> > wrote: > > > Hello, > > I have been looking at the Flink Jira and git. I see a large number of > > Flink Jira issues that are open and critical or blockers > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-36655?jql=project%20%3D%20FLINK%20AND%20priority%20in%20(Blocker%2C%20Critical) > > I realise some of these issues may not actually be critical as they have > > been labelled by the submitter. > > > > I see 1239 open unmerged PRs > > https://github.com/apache/flink/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen. Some of these > > are not associated with assigned issues, so may never be merged. This > > amount of unmerged PRs, means that many people have put a lot of time and > > effort into creating code that has not made it into the codebase, so they > > do not get the credit for the contribution, which must be disheartening > and > > the codebase does not get the benefit of the contribution. > > > > This is a large amount of technical debt. I would like to help address > > this problem by setting up a workgroup, with others in the community who > > would like this addressed. The scope of the workgroup would be to improve > > these numbers by activities such as: > > > > * Triaging PRs so it is easier for committers to merge or close them. > > * Identifying prs that could be closed out as no longer relevant. > > * Getting committer buy in. > > > > Are there other ideas from the community around how this could be > improved > > with or without a workgroup, or whether the existing processes should be > > sufficient or enhanced? > > > > Is there an appetite to address this in the community? I am happy to > drive > > this as a community workgroup, with my team in IBM, if there is community > > support. > > > > We could call the community workgroup ?Community Health Initiative? CHI > to > > energise the Flink community. > > > > WDYT? > > > > Kind regards, David. > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN >
