Given the support this is receiving, it looks like the next step is to bring CODEOWNERS to develop.
https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/5855 has been created to merge the CODEOWNERS file to develop. I filled in a few gaps based on commit history for those areas…if so I’ve tagged you and/or added you as a reviewer. If you are in any way not comfortable please -1 and/or push changes directly to this PR branch. Let’s keep this PR open for another week to allow time for everyone to see it and raise any concerns, and plan to merge to develop on Dec 22. From: Jens Deppe <jde...@vmware.com> Date: Monday, December 14, 2020 at 7:25 AM To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode I've self-nominated for redis, management and security. --Jens On 12/14/20, 1:44 AM, "Owen Nichols" <onich...@vmware.com> wrote: Thanks @Dave and @Karen for volunteering as code owners! The Dec 14 deadline @Robert set is today. So far 11 of the 268 slots have been filled. To volunteer, follow these steps: cd geode git checkout feature/introduce-codeowners git pull vi CODEOWNERS git add CODEOWNERS git commit -m "I volunteered" git push You may need to uncomment the line if you’re the first to append your @githubusername. Two or more volunteers on each line is desirable. From: Owen Nichols <onich...@vmware.com> Date: Monday, December 7, 2020 at 4:53 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode Let’s keep this simple. If you’re nominating yourself, just commit to the branch directly. If you wish to nominate someone else, make a PR and tag them as a reviewer. From: Robert Houghton <rhough...@vmware.com> Date: Monday, December 7, 2020 at 1:38 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode To be honest, I hadn’t thought of the mess that might make. I guess, we can either make changes directly to the feature branch, which will eventually have a pull-request back to [develop], or we can modify Owen’s existing PR. At the end of the day, it all has to go through the normal PR process back to the develop branch. -Robert From: Jens Deppe <jde...@vmware.com> Date: Monday, December 7, 2020 at 11:43 AM To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode Should we just be adding to Owen's PR? If everyone creates their own PR we'll probably end up with a bunch of merge conflicts. --Jens On 12/7/20, 10:07 AM, "Robert Houghton" <rhough...@vmware.com> wrote: I haven’t seen any negative responses, and a big THANK YOU to @onichols for making the first PR to self-volunteer into ownership of some code. Lets give people another week to nominate, or self-nominate, as PRs against [feature/introduce-codeowners], and plan to merge this feature into develop on 14 December? From: Owen Nichols <onich...@vmware.com> Date: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 8:56 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode It looks like the discussion period ended Nov 25 with all comments in support, so next phase is populating the proposed codeowners file. @Robert how long do we have to populate this before you plan to formally propose activating it on develop? As prescribed I’ve submitted a PR[1] against the feature/introduce-codeowners branch to nominate myself as a code owner for areas I feel qualified to own. [1] https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fgeode%2Fpull%2F5802&data=04%7C01%7Conichols%40vmware.com%7C7854a754cb3a497dd1e708d8a0447ab0%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637435563266632621%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=aSkQcQR0AnjhY7402yWd96xZTo3%2FViC4SCGBjm8ZySE%3D&reserved=0 From: Xiaojian Zhou <zho...@vmware.com> Date: Friday, November 20, 2020 at 11:06 AM To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode +1 I saw the template of splitting the geode code. Can someone nominate a few codeowners in the file as examples? On 11/20/20, 7:32 AM, "Alexander Murmann" <amurm...@vmware.com> wrote: +1 I agree with Owen's point that this will improve the experience for new contributors. It also helps people new to the community to have confidence that they got the type of review they need to feel confident to merge. I might get to reviews that are both from great committers who can review for things like coding style, test coverage etc. However, I might be unaware that neither of them know the area I am modifying particularly well. This solves this problem. I can merge with more confidence, once I got the review from the owner. ________________________________ From: Anthony Baker <bak...@vmware.com> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 17:55 To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode +1 I think we as a project will need to iterator on the code owners as well as the process for code owners. But this is a model that has been adopted by a number of OSS projects both within and outside of Apache. I like that it provides visibility to PR authors and associates motivated experts to review and merge changes. Anthony > On Nov 19, 2020, at 10:46 AM, Ernie Burghardt <burghar...@vmware.com> wrote: > > Perfect, then let's give this a try. > +1 > > On 11/19/20, 10:45 AM, "Robert Houghton" <rhough...@vmware.com> wrote: > > Hi Ernie, > > DRAFT PRs do not get reviewers by default, but when the draft transitions to ‘ready’, then the owners are requested to review. > > > From: Ernie Burghardt <burghar...@vmware.com> > Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 9:56 AM > To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode > Does GitHub allow us to limit this automated action to non-DRAFT PRs? > > On 11/18/20, 8:28 PM, "Owen Nichols" <onich...@vmware.com> wrote: > > +1 This will greatly improve the experience for contributors. Instead of an intimidating empty list of reviewers when you submit a PR (and no ability to add reviewers, if you’re not a committer), it will be great to already have at least two reviewers automagically assigned. > > I have a small concern that initially populating this file via a flurry of PRs may result in a lot of merge conflicts with anyone else that volunteers on the same or an adjacent line. Also, since you _must_ be a committer to be a code owner, is a PR even necessary…would directly committing changes to the feature/introduce-codeowners branch be acceptable? If not, who needs to review and who can merge the PRs against the ‘introduce’ branch? > > What happens if you are the only owner for an area, can you approve your own PR? Even if the goal is two owners per area, does that mean PRs by either owner cannot be merged if the only other owner is on vacation or otherwise unavailable? > > Can we submit PRs against the ‘introduce’ branch now and they just won’t be merged before Nov 26, or do we all just need to be patient until this review period has concluded? > > From: Robert Houghton <rhough...@apache.org> > Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 2:07 PM > To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode > Hello Devs. > > I would like to improve the quality of the pull-request reviews we see for > critical parts of the Apache Geode project. In discussions with other > committers, a (not the) big hurdle to that is getting the right eyes to > look at a given PR. To that end, I propose the adoption of GitHub's > CODEOWNERS functionality for the Apache Geode code repository. > > A discussion-document of this issue has been written up > by @upthewaterspout. Thanks Dan! > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FGEODE%2FIntroduce%2BCodeowners%2Bfile&data=04%7C01%7Conichols%40vmware.com%7C7854a754cb3a497dd1e708d8a0447ab0%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637435563266632621%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=nOaEbpbbXYWbIAxJqVOeES8NWQuV7iERAZj5ekDMIqs%3D&reserved=0 > > I have tested the feature with fellow Geode committers @upthewaterspout > and @onichols-pivotal, and found it to meet our expectations. Please > review the document, and comment or reply to this thread, by 25 November, > so we might start the task of nominating and applying for ownership. > > -Robert Houghton >
