The coding contribution process that was discussed earlier is now at: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/HAWQ/Contributing+to+HAWQ
Let's keep it up-to-date if we want to revise it. Cheers Lei On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Michael Schubert <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Forwarding here to discuss on the list as something of a point of order > on > > process for us to discuss. These are all open questions in my mind: > > > > * is it ok for people to comment on pull requests? (or rather: to have a > > discussion there) > > Personally, I tend to like peer review tools. At ASF you've got a choice > of ReviewBoard reviews.apache.org or GH PR reviews. You can always > roll your own tool too, but I'd rather stay away from that for now. > > > * should people be reminded to please re-post their comment on the JIRA > > issue? > > That's a great point. For every pull request that needs to generate > a commit in the project JIRA needs to be created sooner or later. > I guess sooner is better ;-) > > > * should we drop a link to the JIRA issue on such pull requests to > redirect > > the conversation? > > > > Amr's comment was highly pertinent as the issue raised was regarding > > multiple p4ignore files but the patch only addressed one so letting it go > > unanswered or left on the pull request without reflecting it in JIRA > seems > > bad. Now of course he re-posted his comment on JIRA but for the sake of > > this discussion if he had not, I'm wondering how best to handle this. > > > > Have other ASF projects reached opinions on this matter? > > Apache Geode (incubating) has a very nicely documented workflow > that covers all of the above: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Code+contributions > I suggest you guys take a look at it and start documenting your > own preferences on the HAWQ wiki. > > I also know that Lei has some thoughts on the subject, so perhaps he > can chime in. > > Thanks, > Roman. >
