Hi everyone,

I spoke with Joern in Slack. Some of his concerns are:

1. This was done with a Merge commit and apparently they squash and rebase. 
[would be helpful to see some pointer on this for documentation, thus far I 
haven’t found any]
2. Apparently we literally need to ask others for +1 votes and record them 
before committing? I thought since Ana and I are committers aren were +1, 
and since Joern had been providing feedback (the last of which was to add
tests, which we did) that he would be +1 as well (I guess he is not, and I guess
formally we need to do a +1 vote even still)
3. There was concern about scalability of the code.
4. There are thoughts that the code was not perfect yet (even though it works
fine in the MEMEX project for Ana and I)

So, Joern has opened up a revert PR. 

I suppose I should state I find this process extremely heavyweight and 
unwelcoming.
To me, there should be a modicum of trust for committers, but I feel like even 
as a 
committer, I am operating as a “contributor” to the project. Committer means 
that
there is trust to modify the source code base. Of the issues above, the only 
one I see
as a moderate snafu was #1, and frankly if there are some instructions that 
show me
how to do squashing and rebasing *first* I will try to do that in the future 
since I am
not a GIt expert. 

That said, I must state I feel pretty put off by Apache OpenNLP. This 
originated as a GSoC 
effort, and we have worked pretty consistently on this over the last year. We 
used a
separate GitHub project to get started, kept Joern involved as another mentor, 
even
provided access and commit writes to that GitHub repository for a long time, so 
this
code was developed in the open. Joern even created a branch in ApacheOpenNLP in 
the code and I suppose
I should have gone and worked on that branch first since master is apparently 
so 
pristine that even an Apache veteran like me can’t get something in to it 
without 
making a whole bunch of (what are IMO minor issues, and what are IMO heavyweight
“community” issues). 

I am concerned from a community point of view that the first comment wasn’t 
“Great
job Chris, you got Sentiment Analysis into Apache, *but* I have these concerns 
1-4 above”.
It was “The PR was merged wrong in ways 1-4 and I’m going to revert it.”

That’s pretty off-putting to someone who is semi-new like me and like Ana.

Anyways, go ahead and revert it. Sorry to have caused any issues. 

Chris



On 6/27/17, 7:06 AM, "Chris Mattmann" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hi Joern,
    
    I’m confused. Why did you revert my commit?
    
    Every one of those check points you put on the PR was checked?
    We have been discussing this for months, you have seen the 
    code for months, Ana and I have worked diligently on the code
    in plain view of everyone.
    
    Please explain.
    
    Chris
    
    
    
    
    On 6/27/17, 1:23 AM, "kottmann" <[email protected]> wrote:
    
        GitHub user kottmann opened a pull request:
        
            https://github.com/apache/opennlp/pull/238
        
            Revert merging of sentiment work, no consent to merge it
        
            Thank you for contributing to Apache OpenNLP.
            
            In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
            to ensure the following steps have been taken:
            
            ### For all changes:
            - [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it 
referenced 
                 in the commit message?
            
            - [ ] Does your PR title start with OPENNLP-XXXX where XXXX is the 
JIRA number you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen 
"-" character.
            
            - [ ] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the 
target branch (typically master)?
            
            - [ ] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?
            
            ### For code changes:
            - [ ] Have you ensured that the full suite of tests is executed via 
mvn clean install at the root opennlp folder?
            - [ ] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
            - [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these 
dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF 
2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)? 
            - [ ] If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE file, including 
the main LICENSE file in opennlp folder?
            - [ ] If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE file, including 
the main NOTICE file found in opennlp folder?
            
            ### For documentation related changes:
            - [ ] Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output 
in which it is rendered?
            
            ### Note:
            Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci 
for build issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.
        
        
        You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
        
            $ git pull https://github.com/kottmann/opennlp revert_sentiment
        
        Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
        
            https://github.com/apache/opennlp/pull/238.patch
        
        To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
        with (at least) the following in the commit message:
        
            This closes #238
            
        ----
        commit 123222eb34724bae793e9d6d22e202c0aee0aa45
        Author: Jörn Kottmann <[email protected]>
        Date:   2017-06-27T08:19:19Z
        
            Revert merging of sentiment work, no consent to merge it
        
        ----
        
        
        ---
        If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have 
your
        reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this 
feature
        enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, 
please
        contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA 
ticket
        with INFRA.
        ---
        
    
    
    


Reply via email to