I can get behind that point of view too. That's what I've told people who expect Assignee is a necessary part of workflow. The existence of a PR link is a signal someone's working on it.
In that case we need not do anything. On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Patrick Wendell <pwend...@gmail.com> wrote: > One over arching issue is that it's pretty unclear what "Assigned to > X" in JIAR means from a process perspective. Personally I actually > feel it's better for this to be more historical - i.e. who ended up > submitting a patch for this feature that was merged - rather than > creating an exclusive reservation for a particular user to work on > something. > > If an issue is "assigned" to person X, but some other person Y submits > a great patch for it, I think we have some obligation to Spark users > and to the community to merge the better patch. So the idea of > reserving the right to add a feature, it just seems overall off to me. > IMO, its fine if multiple people want to submit competing patches for > something, provided everyone comments on JIRA saying they are > intending to submit a patch, and everyone understands there is > duplicate effort. So commenting with an intention to submit a patch, > IMO seems like the healthiest workflow since it is non exclusive. > > To me the main benefit of "assigning" something ahead of time is if > you have a committer that really wants to see someone specific work on > a patch, it just acts as a strong signal that there is someone > endorsed to work on that patch. That doesn't mean no one else can > submit a patch, but it is IMO more of a warning that there may be > existing work which is likely to be high quality, to avoid duplicated > effort. > > When it was really easy to assign features to themselves, I saw a lot > of anti-patterns in the community that seemed unhealthy, specifically: > > - It was really unclear what it means semantically if someone is > assigned to a JIRA. > - People assign JIRA's to themselves that aren't a good fit, given the > authors level of experience. > - People expect if they assign JIRA's to themselves that others won't > submit patches, and become upset if they do. > - People are discouraged from working on a patch because someone else > was officially assigned. > > - Patrick > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> Anecdotally, there are a number of people asking to set the Assignee >> field. This is currently restricted to Committers in JIRA. I know the >> logic was to prevent people from Assigning a JIRA and then leaving it; >> it also matters a bit for questions of "credit". >> >> Still I wonder if it's best to just let people go ahead and set it, as >> the lesser "evil". People can already do a lot like resolve JIRAs and >> set shepherd and critical priority and all that. >> >> I think the intent was to let "Developers" set this, but maybe due to >> an error, that's not how the current JIRA permission is implemented. >> >> I ask because I'm about to ping INFRA to update our scheme. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org
