I would be happy to review all of the ECO codebase and examples to verify that the package change has not caused any issues.
-Josh On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:54 PM P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> wrote: > That’s up to the project to decide. ;) > > Mentors are here to help you make sure what you decide upon is consistent > with the Apache Way. > > -Taylor > > > On Apr 5, 2018, at 7:50 PM, Karthik Ramasamy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks Dave and Taylor for the advice. Owners is not probably what I > meant. > > Instead, I could call them Reviewers - for this PR. > > > > Long term since there are so many different modules and each committer > > develop different area of expertise, what is the recommended > > way to review the code and merge them into master? > > > > cheers > > /karthik > > > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:56 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> As a mentor, I would recommend you avoid any concept of “ownership” like > >> the plague. It implies a project hierarchy that ASF projects do not > have. > >> > >> In ASF projects committer bits are boolean. Bob’s committer bit is no > >> different from Alice’s. Their project expertise may lie in different > areas > >> of the codebase, but they are inherently *trusted* not to make reckless > >> changes without collaboration/review with other committers. > >> > >> If you feel you must go down this path, I would suggest different > language > >> than “owner”. At best it should be an informal designation (not a role) > by > >> a volunteer who is willing to help shepherd that section of the codebase > >> (e.g. help with/perform PR reviews, groom issues, revive discussions, > >> etc.). I would also recommend documenting the concept, specifically how > >> others can get involved. > >> > >> -Taylor > >> > >>> On Apr 5, 2018, at 6:02 PM, Karthik Ramasamy <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Ashvin - > >>> > >>> It could be good to designate owners for different areas - let me come > up > >>> with a list by the end of the today tonight. > >>> > >>> cheers > >>> /karthik > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Ning Wang <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> Make sense to me. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:19 AM, Ashvin A <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Devs, > >>>>> > >>>>> PR 2840 renames com.twitter package to org.apache. This change > touches > >>>> more > >>>>> than *2,127* files. Is there a test strategy for this change which > >>>> updates > >>>>> everything? I believe just depending on unit and integration tests > may > >> be > >>>>> insufficient. > >>>>> > >>>>> Also I am hoping git history will be preserved. > >>>>> > >>>>> Should we create a coarse checklist and take ownership of manual > >>>>> verification of individual components? > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. Examples > >>>>> 2. Heron UI > >>>>> 1. Metrics > >>>>> 2. Logs > >>>>> 3. API server > >>>>> 4. Heron client > >>>>> 5. Docker > >>>>> 6. Schedulers > >>>>> 1. Aurora > >>>>> 2. Kubernetes > >>>>> 3. Yarn > >>>>> 4. .. > >>>>> 7. Python > >>>>> 8. Heron Tracker > >>>>> 9. Heron metrics cache > >>>>> 10. Heron Health manager > >>>>> 11. ... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Ashvin > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > > -- Sent from A Mobile Device
