The update to the Iceberg site has been committed and deployed. Thanks for fixing this, Jakob.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 11:59 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com> wrote: > Thanks Jokob! I've reviewed the PR and will commit it and redeploy the > site once it's updated. > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 11:47 AM Jakob Homan <jgho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The website only lists the dev@, commits@ and private@ lists[1]. I've >> opened a PR[2] to add the issues@ list to make it more visible to new >> members of the community. >> >> -Jakob >> [1] https://iceberg.incubator.apache.org/community/ >> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-iceberg/pull/724 >> >> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 10:38 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > Github updates are sent to iss...@iceberg.apache.org. Sorry for the >> confusion. The background is that the notifications originally went to the >> dev list, but the traffic was annoyingly high because it included not just >> issue or PR creation, but also every individual comment. A few people let >> us know that they were going to unsubscribe, so we created the issues list >> for people that wanted to keep up that way. Here's what we reported about >> it in our January 2019 board report: >> > >> > > Gitbox traffic is now going to issues@. The community was losing dev@ >> subscribers because of the high volume of traffic from Gitbox. However, now >> all updates are sent to issues@. It would be nice to have emails from >> creation go to dev@, while updates and resolutions would go the issues@. >> > >> > There is still a lot of traffic going to issues@, but you can use mail >> filters to select what you'd like to see. >> > >> > I think it's generally okay that most discussion happens on pull >> requests. I think that's a common pattern across communities for small >> discussions, while larger discussions tend to happen on the dev list, like >> the Iceberg community discussions about row-level deletes. Right now, we >> have been primarily focusing on working on the things that we've already >> discussed, like getting the vectorization code committed to master. >> > >> > rb >> > >> > On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:21 AM Anton Okolnychyi >> <aokolnyc...@apple.com.invalid> wrote: >> >> >> >> I also think it’s a good idea to have an email thread dedicated to >> reviews/issues. >> >> >> >> - Anton >> >> >> >> > On 6 Jan 2020, at 17:06, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > I also joined the dev@ list to keep abreast of what's going on in >> >> > Iceberg. If all of the development activity is happening on GitHub >> >> > issues and pull requests, then it seems like all of this activity >> >> > should be mirrored to _some_ mailing list, for example >> >> > github@iceberg.a.o. This creates a searchable archive of the >> project's >> >> > history which seems like the goal of the ASF's email list policy. >> >> > >> >> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jim Apple <jbap...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails >> than dev@. Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new >> email to reviews@. >> >> >> >> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?d...@impala.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?revi...@impala.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> >> From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should >> have more design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code >> reviews and absent a deep culture and history of distinguishing between >> what should just be in a code review and what needs to be in a dev@ >> design discussion, things seems to be in balance. >> >> >> >> >> >> On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool >> that Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the >> balance of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a >> user. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved >> in. This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other >> than the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on >> Github (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations >> against the dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we >> had email counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs >> closed/month number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on >> the dev list. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> What do other people think about this? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue >> <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Hi everyone, >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you >> have anything to add, please reply! >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> rb >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> -------------------- >> >> >>>> ## Iceberg >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before >> graduating: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> 1. Grow the Iceberg community >> >> >>>> 2. Add more committers and PPMC members >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be >> aware of? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> No issues. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were >> merged for an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the >> previous monthly average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this >> contribution rate is still very active and healthy. Contributions are >> coming from a regular group of contributors outside of the initial set of >> committers, which is a positive indication for adding new committers and >> PPMC members over the next few months. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg, >> 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and >> included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active >> with community members testing out the release and reporting problems. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0 >> release >> >> >>>> - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged >> into master >> >> >>>> - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed >> >> >>>> - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read >> path is near commit >> >> >>>> - Flaky tests have been fixed >> >> >>>> - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied >> to all modules >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity? >> >> >>>> Please feel free to add your own commentary. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - [ ] Initial setup >> >> >>>> - [ ] Working towards first release >> >> >>>> - [x] Community building >> >> >>>> - [x] Nearing graduation >> >> >>>> - [ ] Other: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### Date of last release: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019 >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019 >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote. >> Thanks to our mentors for being active! >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any >> issues. >> >> >>>> The project name has been approved. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> ### Signed-off-by: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue >> >> >>>> Comments: >> >> >>>> - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem >> >> >>>> Comments: >> >> >>>> - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley >> >> >>>> Comments: >> >> >>>> - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor >> >> >>>> Comments: >> >> >>>> - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach >> >> >>>> Comments: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> -- >> >> >>>> Ryan Blue >> >> >>>> Software Engineer >> >> >>>> Netflix >> >> >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Ryan Blue >> > Software Engineer >> > Netflix >> > > > -- > Ryan Blue > Software Engineer > Netflix > -- Ryan Blue Software Engineer Netflix
