Cong, I understand your frustration with the review process and backports. I've already created a ticket to track the latter. Would love your input/feedback on it.
Regarding the former, we understand the pain. Our use of shepherds is a way to tackle the problem. While it's not perfect it has definitely improved the situation IMO. As Jie mentioned earlier, if you have some other concrete suggestions to improve the process please join us in our community syncs and help us! We will be grateful. It is not an easy problem to solve. As an aside, I feel the tone of this thread has gone from being constructive to being attacking and personal. This is not acceptable in the Mesos community. Please refer to http://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html for our code of conduct. This might be different from the Linux community. On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Cong Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Jie Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Why not check your backlog for your answer? Or do you need me to write > >> a script to scan all the pending review requests for you? > > > > > > OK, i just looked at your pending patches: > > https://reviews.apache.org/users/wangcong/?show-closed=0 > > > > The associated tickets: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4740 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2769 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2799 > > > > (Some of the rb request does not have associated tickets) > > Even your rb doesn't have one: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/44922/ > > Not to mention those commits don't even have a RB at all... > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/commit/19dd467500ea31371dbebe73a4acfa0346aa9e40 > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/commit/8c83b843dfcd08f82a394c29939f3c5940a78027 > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/commit/2de2e5791a6c119e26e9e0bc35bdea4b2e54bbec > > What's your point here? > > > > > > I don't see a shepherd for MESOS-4740. Looks like Vinod is the shepherd > for > > MESOS-2769. MESOS-2799 does not have shepherd as well, but I think that > > should be me. Are you still interested in shipping those patches? > > Whether to ship my patches or not is a trivial problem to fix, the > bigger problem, > which you keep ignoring, is why this rule (shepherd, ping etc.) can't be > improved? > > > > > > I think you made a valid point that there is some problem regarding: > > 1) Do we want to work on all created tickets (i.e., how do we decide if > we > > want to accept a ticket or not), and who decide that? > > Why always need a ticket? Some big feature does need one to track > the subtickets, I definitely agree, but for things like a typo fix > apparently not. > > It doesn't worth the time at all to create a ticket when you just > want to fix some indention like the one you did: > > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/commit/19dd467500ea31371dbebe73a4acfa0346aa9e40 > > (although I think this worth a RB). > > > > 2) Once we accept the ticket, how can we prioritize those tickets? Should > > PMC members groom the accepted tickets regularly? > > Why prioritize tickets rather than just reviews? Code is on review board > not > in tickets, you should be able to evaluate the code to decide if it is > ready to > merge or not. Linux kernel never uses tickets to track features, once > all reviews > are addresses it would be merged. > > > > 3) If no committer is volunteer for the accepted ticket, what's the > > procedure in that case, should we pick one? > > 4) What's the procedure of finding another shepherd if the original > > shepherd does not have time for that anymore. > > > Promote new committers, seriously. > > You have 20+ committers, if all of you are working, you should be able to > handle all the reviews. The problem is apparently some of you are not > working, so why not promote new ones to replace non-working ones? >
