i think there is a confusion here. There is no policy coded into the script. It is still left to the community to come up with a policy. If you want me to make a proposal about the policy, I am happy to do that.
What the script is really offering is to automating (end enforcing) the steps that committers need to run manually. It is still the committer’s responsibility for choosing labels, milestones and deciding cherrypicks. That says the tool is not the policy, it is trying to standardize what people is doing manually. The discussion of a policy should happen regardless it is manually or automated. As you said, different projects have different way for doing things. Both of us have biases on doing things. ATS might have its practice doing things and it applies to the community. However I do not see that will apply to the community here. Even some of our committers know the “steps”, but they are just forgetting sometimes during their daily engineering life. The tool here is only meant to help automate the steps. It automated the “steps” currently the committers are using manually, so people will have to really think of the steps when doing manually. And again the discussion about the policy (or the steps for merging a PR) should happen regardless it is scripted or manually. Regarding the pain points, I have stated what I have observed and encountered in my previous comments. The pain point comes from committer doing things manually, different things are missing during merging and that causes the problems in release. The solution I am proposing is to use a script to automate (and enforce) the steps that committers are doing manually. I provide what I can provide. Not sure what else I can provide. [ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/pull/2526 ] This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for [email protected]
