On Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Cathedral-Bazaar-Musings-Accidental-Revolutionary-ebook/dp/B0026OR3LM
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Marco de Abreu < marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I agree. How about we find another way to allow people to subscribe for > changes in a specific file or directory? > > -Marco > > Am 12.01.2018 8:51 nachm. schrieb "Chris Olivier" <cjolivie...@gmail.com>: > > > Have you read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"? > > > > http://www.unterstein.net/su/docs/CathBaz.pdf > > > > One of the points I took from this is that once a project finds its > stride, > > it actually runs more efficiently without centralization than with. > > > > -Chris > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > you have a good point about people being afraid of reviewing PRs which > > they > > > are not assigned to and I totally agree that we should encourage > > everybody > > > to review PRs. > > > > > > One important advantage I see in this is the notification: since we are > > not > > > using the feature to required an approval, this step is entirely for > > > information purpose. I, for example, would like to get notified if a PR > > to > > > change a CI file would be created. Just as an example: over Christmas, > a > > PR > > > to update mkl has been pushed without me knowing about it. Somehow, > after > > > my vacation, we started to get issues with mkl test - I only found out > > > about this PR after quite a long investigation. If we would extend the > > > usage of the code maintainers, we'll make sure that changes like these > > will > > > notify the people who have the best knowledge about that part. > > > > > > Marco > > > > > > Am 12.01.2018 8:03 nachm. schrieb "Chris Olivier" < > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > > > -1 (binding) > > > > > > > > I totally understand the motivation for this (I've definitely saved > > > myself > > > > some grief by getting called out automatically for CMakeLists.txt > > stuff, > > > > for example), but I respectfully decline for the following reason(s): > > > > > > > > I feel that defining code-owners has some negative effects. > > > > > > > > Other committers may be reluctant to start reviewing and approving > PRs > > > > since they aren't the one listed, so I feel this will in the long-run > > > > reduce the number of people doing code reviews. > > > > > > > > If there aren't enough people doing PR's, then people can complain on > > > dev@ > > > > asking for review. > > > > > > > > -Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Haibin Lin <hai...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > On 2018-01-12 10:10, kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 12, 2018 6:32 PM, "Steffen Rochel" < > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I propose to adopt the proposal. > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 8:39 PM Mu Li <muli....@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Isabel, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My apologies that not saying that clearly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The purpose of this proposal is encouraging more contributors > > to > > > > help > > > > > > > > review and merge PRs. And also hope to shorten the time for a > > PR > > > to > > > > > be > > > > > > > > merged. After assigning maintainers to modules, then PR > > > > contributors > > > > > can > > > > > > > > easily contact the reviewers. In other words, github will > > > > > automatically > > > > > > > > assign the PR to the maintainer and send a notification > email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think I put the term "inbox" in my proposal. I never > > > > > discussed > > > > > > > PRs > > > > > > > > with other contributors by sending email directly, which is > > less > > > > > > > effective > > > > > > > > than just using github. I also don't aware any other > > contributor > > > > use > > > > > the > > > > > > > > direct email way. So I didn't clarify it on the proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Isabel Drost-Fromm < > > > > > isa...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 9. Januar 2018 18:25:50 MEZ schrieb Mu Li < > > > muli....@gmail.com > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > >We should encourage to contract a specific contributor for > > > > issues > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > >PRs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My head translates "encourage to contact specific > > contributor" > > > > into > > > > > > > > > "encourage to contact specific contributors inbox". This > > > > translated > > > > > > > > version > > > > > > > > > is what I would highly discourage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See the disclaimer here for reasons behind that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://home.apache.org/~hossman/#private_q > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isabel > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail > > > > > gesendet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
