Hey folks

We have recently had some big PR contributions (such as Go Client, Gremln
language semantics) which are complex enough to require a technical design
review by the community.

Currently, as a project, we don't seem to have a process or mechanism which
suggests that the contributors should provide an accompanying design doc to
their PRs. This leads to churn during the implementation/PR phase.

In light of the above, may I suggest the following:
1. Add a section in the "contributing to TinkerPop
<https://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/dev/developer/#_contributing>"
page where contributors should be encouraged to submit a design document
(via JIRA) for complex changes/new features before their PR could be
considered for review.
2. Establish a process for design reviews (similar to other Kafka projects)
where a design should be approved by PMC votes.
3. Each design get's a PMC shepherd who would be intimately familiar with
the design and would be the primary code reviewer.

Examples of other Apache projects having a similar process:
1. Kafka's KIP:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/kafka/kafka+improvement+proposals
2. Spark's SPIP: https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html

Thoughts?

Regards,
Divij Vaidya

Reply via email to