Revisiting this thread, I wonder if the "soft rules" are working. I have noticed quite a few PRs merged recently with outstanding comments. The most recent of these that I personally reviewed are #1220 <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1220>, #1226 <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1226>, and #1230 <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1230> but there are doubtless other examples.
If, indeed, the guidelines are not working perhaps stricter enforcement more consistent with JB's initial proposal would be effective. On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 8:21 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <dmitri.bourlatch...@dremio.com.invalid> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 5:15 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > Let's rename from "guidelines" to "good practices & advices" :) > > > > +1 to that. I'm not sure it worth trying to "codify a spirit" (from > previous emails), but > I think having good advice is helpful to instill the spirit of goodwill and > collaboration > into the community. > > In this regard: > > - I propose to create a PR to update the contributing guide with this > > good practices discussed in this thread > > > > +1 > > - I propose to close https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/840 in > > favor of "soft rule" (we quickly discuss about owner review with > > > > +1 > > CODEOWNERS in this PR, but let's keep aside for now) > > - I propose to update https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/839. We > > have a consensus about the label, but no consensus about the schedule > > for now. In order to move forward, I propose to update the PR with > > just the label for now (as we have a consensus) and see if it's > > enough. If it's still a concern, I will create a new PR to update the > > schedule > > > +1 > > Cheers, > Dmitri. >
