During the MXNet 1.0 release, there was feedback from the mentors and folks in general@ to clarify at the top of the CODEOWNERs file on what the contents of this file meant.
Hi Mu, Please add the description of the file in the file header. I expect that this will be a requirement for the next MXNet release 1.0.1. Thanks, Bhavin Thaker. On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 5:43 PM Chris Olivier <[email protected]> wrote: > i’d be +1 if CODEOWNERS file has a big note at the top saying basically > it’s just for watching code changes that you’d like to know about (to > review or just to follow) and that anyone can add themself. > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:58 PM Chris Olivier <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Does it have to be called "CODEOWNERS"? I would be more comfortable with > > it if it's a "watch list" where it just means you wish to watch code here > > or there in the source structure and anyone can add or remove their name > > from watching some part of the code at any time. > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > [email protected]> 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" < > [email protected] > >> >: > >> > >> > 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 < > >> > [email protected]> 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" < > >> [email protected] > >> > >: > >> > > > >> > > > -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 <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > +1 (binding) > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On 2018-01-12 10:10, kellen sunderland < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Jan 12, 2018 6:32 PM, "Steffen Rochel" < > >> [email protected] > >> > > > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I propose to adopt the proposal. > >> > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Steffen > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 8:39 PM Mu Li <[email protected]> > >> > 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 < > >> > > > > [email protected]> > >> > > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Am 9. Januar 2018 18:25:50 MEZ schrieb Mu Li < > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > > >: > >> > > > > > > > > >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. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
