Hi, Ajantha: Sounds good to me.
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 7:43 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Yes, it sounds good. Let's see what the others are thinking. > > Thanks, > Regards > JB > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 10:33 AM Ajantha Bhat <ajanthab...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Yeah, > > I would call them "subtasks" with one GH issue per task and track all > the subtasks from the proposal template GH issue. > > PRs can be mapped to respective subtasks. > > > > I will open a PR to update the proposal template if we have consensus. > > > > - Ajantha > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 1:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Ajantha > >> > >> It's a good idea. Why not extending the proposal process we have ? We > >> can add the "roadmap/PRs" lists in a comment in the proposal issue. > >> > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 7:11 PM Ajantha Bhat <ajanthab...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hey everyone, > >> > > >> > We have several active projects, such as Views, multi-table > transactions, Kafka Connect, and partition stats, etc., where proposals > have been approved but implementation is still ongoing. > >> > Most of these proposals will involve multiple PRs, making it > difficult to monitor progress and identify pending tasks. > >> > > >> > Some progress is being tracked here: > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/projects?type=classic. > >> > However, only committers can update this, making it challenging for > non-committers to contribute. Also, currently it only covers a few > proposals and it is not actively maintained. > >> > > >> > As a workaround for partition stats, I've set up a task tracker > that's easy to update without requiring extra permissions: > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8450 > >> > > >> > I suggest standardizing a method for tracking progress on ongoing > proposals. > >> > We could potentially integrate the chosen mechanism with the proposal > issue template ( > https://lists.apache.org/thread/6x324jlyf7hy0j0slzgg8v08vmb9zj0s). > >> > > >> > Please share any ideas or your thoughts on standardizing this process. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Ajantha >
