Hi Vinoth, Yes. In a sense, we need to define the boundary of "MINOR".
For this discussion, I want to raise two core issues: - File and manage the code cleanup(especially, based on the tips and warnings come from Intellij IDEA); - The contributors who want to do these kinds of code cleanup should find a mentor or responsible person before working; I don't think this type of work is suitable for directly opening the "MINOR" type of PR. Maybe we need to clearly state what kind of PR can be defined as the "MINOR" type. In fact, this problem is difficult to quantify (although, as you said, for example, changing the number of lines, etc.). >From a qualitative point of view, it may be no functionality changes. And it is very easy that the reviewer can intuitively approve this change without waiting for the results of Travis, such as typo-type PR and so on. In short, I am big +1 to agree with the clear definition of the scope of the “MINOR” type of PR. Maybe we can list suggestions in the contribution guidelines for the contributors? When a reviewer is reviewing, he needs to evaluate whether a PR is included in the "MINOR" scope? If it cannot be included, you need to go to Jira to register an issue. WDYT? Best, Vino Vinoth Chandar <vin...@apache.org> 于2020年1月27日周一 上午3:25写道： > Hi Vino, > > You raise a valid point on what "MINOR" PR should be. All JIRAs start out > in "NEW" state and committers have to "Accept" the issue already (to force > early conversations like this). > > May be we should draw some bounds on it like, "cannot be more than 50 > lines", "No functionality changes" .. etc? WDYT? This seems to be the core > of the issue. > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 4:17 PM vino yang <yanghua1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Vinoth, > > > > Thank you for your thoughts, I agree that focusing on some higher > priority > > work is more valuable. > > > > This discussion is to sort out and manage the work that the community is > > already doing. There are currently some PRs working on this type of work, > > such as PR[1][2][3][4]. The community has not given guidance on these > > tasks. I think it's not very appropriate to open a "MINOR" PR directly. > So, > > I want to hear from the community and how to manage them more > effectively. > > The discussion does not encourage to give a higher priority to such work. > > > > We haven't stopped this kind of work, so we should provide effective > > guidance and organization so that it doesn't look disorganized. WYDT？ > > > > Best, > > Vino > > > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1237 > > [2]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1139 > > [3]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1137 > > [4]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1136 > > > > Vinoth Chandar <vin...@apache.org> 于2020年1月23日周四 下午1:20写道： > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Thanks everyone for sharing your views! > > > > > > Some of this conversation is starting to feel like boiling the ocean. I > > > believe in refactoring with purpose and discussing class-by-class or > > > module-by-module does not make sense to me. Can we first list down what > > we > > > want to achieve? So far, I have only heard fixing IDE/IntelliJ > warnings. > > > Also instead of focussing on new work, how about looking at the pending > > > JIRAs under "Testing" "Code Cleanup" components first and see if those > > are > > > worth tackling. > > > > > > We went down this path for code formatting and today we still have > > > inconsistencies. Looking back, I feel we should have clearly defined > end > > > goals for the cleanups and we can then rank them based on ROI. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Vinoth > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 7:05 PM vino yang <yanghua1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Shiyan and Bhavani: > > > > > > > > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. > > > > > > > > As I originally stated. The advantage of using modules as a unit to > > split > > > > work is that the decomposition is clear, but the disadvantage is that > > the > > > > volume of changes may be huge, which brings huge risks (considering > > that > > > > Hudi's test coverage is still not very high) and the workload of > > review. > > > > The advantage of splitting by class is that the volume of changes is > > > small > > > > and the review is more convenient, but the disadvantages are too many > > > tasks > > > > and high maintenance costs. > > > > > > > > > > > > *In addition, we need to define the boundaries of the "code cleanup" > I > > > > expressed in this topic: it is limited to the smart tips shown by > > > Intellij > > > > IDEA. If the boundaries are too wide, then this discussion will lose > > > > control.* > > > > I agree with Bhavani that we don't take it as the actual goal. But we > > are > > > > not opposed to the community to help improve the quality of the code > > > > (basically, these tips given by the IDE are more reasonable). > > > > > > > > > > > > So, I still give my thoughts: We manage this work with Jira. Before > we > > > > start working, we need to find a committer as a mentor. The mentor > must > > > > decide whether the scale of the subtasks is reasonable and whether > > > > additional unit tests need to be added to verify the changes. And the > > > > mentor should be responsible for merged changes. > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Vino > > > > > > > > Bhavani Sudha <bhavanisud...@gmail.com> 于2020年1月22日周三 下午2:22写道： > > > > > > > > > Hi @vinoyang thanks for bringing this to discussion. I feel it > would > > be > > > > > less disruptive to clean up code as part of individual classes > being > > > > > touched for a specific goal rather than code cleanup being the > actual > > > > goal. > > > > > This would narrow the touch point and ensure test coverage (both > unit > > > and > > > > > integration tests) catches any accidental/unintentional changes. > > Also > > > it > > > > > would give chance to change any documentation quoting/referencing > > that > > > > > code. Wanted to share my personal opinion. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Sudha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:36 AM Shiyan Xu < > > > xu.shiyan.raym...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The clean-up work can actually be split by modules. > > > > > > > > > > > > Though it is generally a good practice to follow, my concern is > the > > > > > > clean-up is likely to cause conflicts with some on-going changes. > > If > > > I > > > > > may > > > > > > suggest, the dedicated clean-up tasks should avoid > > > > > > - modules that are undergoing multiple feature changes/PRs > > > > > > - modules that are planned to have major refactoring due to > design > > > > > changes > > > > > > (since clean-up can be done altogether during refactoring) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:17 AM Vinoth Chandar < > vin...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure if I fully agree with sweeping statements being made. > > But, > > > > +1 > > > > > > for > > > > > > > structuring this work via Jiras and having some committer > > “accept” > > > > the > > > > > > > issue first. Some of these tend to be subjective and we do > need > > to > > > > > make > > > > > > > different tradeoffs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 1:28 AM vino yang < > yanghua1...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Pratyaksh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your thought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's listen to others' comments. If there is no objection, > we > > > will > > > > > > > follow > > > > > > > > this way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Vino > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pratyaksh Sharma <pratyaks...@gmail.com> 于2020年1月21日周二 > > 下午4:56写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vino, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Big +1 for this initiative. I have done this code cleanup > for > > > > test > > > > > > > > classes > > > > > > > > > in the past and strongly feel there is a need to do the > same > > at > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > places as well. I would definitely like to volunteer for > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 1:52 PM vino yang < > > > yanghua1...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently, the code quality of some Hudi module is not > very > > > > well. > > > > > > As > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > developers have seen, the Intellij IDEA has shown many > > > > > intellisense > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > cleanup and improvement. The community does not object to > > > doing > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > cleanup > > > > > > > > > > and improvement work and the work has been started via > some > > > > > direct > > > > > > > > > "minor" > > > > > > > > > > PRs by some volunteers. The current way is unorganized > and > > > hard > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > manage. > > > > > > > > > > For tracking this work, I prefer to manage this work with > > the > > > > > Jira > > > > > > > > issue. > > > > > > > > > > We can create an umbrella issue. Then, split the work > into > > > > > several > > > > > > > > > > subtasks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since those "bad smell" lays anywhere in the whole > project. > > > > It's > > > > > > > > > difficult > > > > > > > > > > to give a standard to split the subtasks. For example, > some > > > > files > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > lot while some modules have few. So I suggest the > standard > > > > would > > > > > > > depend > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > the volume of the changes. Before working, any subtask > > should > > > > > find > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > committer as a mentor who would judge and approve the > scope > > > is > > > > > > > > suitable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any comments and suggestions would be appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > > > Vino > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
