Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-06-29 Thread Kai Jiang 
That's an interesting experiment. From new contributor's aspect, I would
see more small feature project ideas (just like rust community do). Since
existing beginner issues give new contributors a vague roadmap what they
should do next.

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Sourabh Bajaj <
sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:

> The Rust community is trying an interesting experiment for encouraging more
> diversity in the contributors:
> https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/06/27/Increasing-Rusts-Reach.html
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 12:05 PM Sourabh Bajaj 
> wrote:
>
> > I think they can probably reach out to the mentor for questions like: How
> > to navigate the code base? What parts of the code could they use as a
> > pattern? This could be done using the preferred mode of communication
> based
> > on the contributor.
> >
> > My opinion is that large projects and communities may come across as
> > intimidating to first time contributors, so being as welcoming and
> > encouraging is important.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:52 PM Aviem Zur  wrote:
> >
> >> @
> >> Sourabh Bajaj
> >>
> >> The mentoring on starter tickets is an interesting Idea. How would it
> >> technically work?.
> >>
> >> A new contributor assigns a starter ticket to themselves. What happens
> >> from
> >> there?
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:01 PM Ismaël Mejía 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I think it is important to clarify that the developer documentation
> >> > discussed in this thread is of two kinds:
> >> >
> >> > 6.1. Documents with proposals and new designs, those covered by the
> >> > Beam Improvement Proposal (BEAM-566), and that we need to put with a
> >> > single file index (I remember there was a google dir for this but not
> >> > sure it is still valid, and in any case probably the website is a
> >> > better place for this). Is there any progress on this?
> >> >
> >> > 6.2. Documentation about how things work, so new developers can get
> >> > into developing features/fixes for the project, those are the kind
> >> > that Kenneth/Etienne mention and include Stephen’s IO guide but could
> >> > be definitely expanded to include things like how does the different
> >> > runner translation works, or some details on triggers/materialization
> >> > of panes/windows from the SDK point of view. However the hard part of
> >> > this documents is that they should be maintained e.g. updated when the
> >> > code evolves so they don’t get outdated as JB mentions.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Wesley Tanaka
> >> >  wrote:
> >> > > These are the ones I've come across so far, are there others?
> >> > >
> >> > > * Dynamic DoFn https://s.apache.org/a-new-dofn
> >> > >
> >> > > ** Splittable DoFn (Obsoletes Source API)
> >> > http://s.apache.org/splittable-do-fn
> >> > >
> >> > > ** State and Timers for DoFn: https://s.apache.org/beam-state
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > * Lateness https://s.apache.org/beam-lateness
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > * Metrics API http://s.apache.org/beam-metrics-api
> >> > >
> >> > > ** I/O Metrics https://s.apache.org/standard-io-metrics
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > * Runner API http://s.apache.org/beam-runner-api
> >> > >
> >> > > ** https://s.apache.org/beam-runner-composites
> >> > >
> >> > > ** https://s.apache.org/beam-side-inputs-1-pager
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > * Fn API http://s.apache.org/beam-fn-api
> >> > >
> >> > > ---
> >> > > Wesley Tanaka
> >> > > https://wtanaka.com/
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Monday, April 24, 2017, 2:45:45 PM HST, Sourabh Bajaj <
> >> > sourabhba...@google.com.INVALID> wrote:
> >> > > For 6. I think having them in one page on the website where we can
> >> find
> >> > the
> >> > > design docs more easily would be great.
> >> > >
> >> > > 7. For low-hanging-fruit, one thing I really liked from some Mozilla
> >> > > projects was assigning a mentor on the ticket. Someone you can reach
> >> out
> >> > to
> >> > > if you have questions. I think this makes the entry barrier really
> low
> >> > for
> >> > > first time contributors who might feel intimidated asking questions
> >> > > completely in public.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:06 AM Kenneth Knowles
> >>  >> > >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> I like the subject Etienne has brought up, and will give it a
> number
> >> in
> >> > >> this list :-)
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 6. Have more technical reference docs (not just workspace set up)
> for
> >> > >> contributors.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I think this overlaps a lot with a prior discussion about where to
> >> > collect
> >> > >> design proposals [1]. Design docs used to be just dropped into a
> >> public
> >> > >> folder, but that got disorganized. And that thread was about work
> in
> >> > >> progress, so JIRA was a good place for details after a dev@ thread
> >> > agrees
> >> > >> on a proposal. At this point, the designs are pretty solid
> >>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-06-29 Thread Sourabh Bajaj 
The Rust community is trying an interesting experiment for encouraging more
diversity in the contributors:
https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/06/27/Increasing-Rusts-Reach.html

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 12:05 PM Sourabh Bajaj 
wrote:

> I think they can probably reach out to the mentor for questions like: How
> to navigate the code base? What parts of the code could they use as a
> pattern? This could be done using the preferred mode of communication based
> on the contributor.
>
> My opinion is that large projects and communities may come across as
> intimidating to first time contributors, so being as welcoming and
> encouraging is important.
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:52 PM Aviem Zur  wrote:
>
>> @
>> Sourabh Bajaj
>>
>> The mentoring on starter tickets is an interesting Idea. How would it
>> technically work?.
>>
>> A new contributor assigns a starter ticket to themselves. What happens
>> from
>> there?
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:01 PM Ismaël Mejía  wrote:
>>
>> > I think it is important to clarify that the developer documentation
>> > discussed in this thread is of two kinds:
>> >
>> > 6.1. Documents with proposals and new designs, those covered by the
>> > Beam Improvement Proposal (BEAM-566), and that we need to put with a
>> > single file index (I remember there was a google dir for this but not
>> > sure it is still valid, and in any case probably the website is a
>> > better place for this). Is there any progress on this?
>> >
>> > 6.2. Documentation about how things work, so new developers can get
>> > into developing features/fixes for the project, those are the kind
>> > that Kenneth/Etienne mention and include Stephen’s IO guide but could
>> > be definitely expanded to include things like how does the different
>> > runner translation works, or some details on triggers/materialization
>> > of panes/windows from the SDK point of view. However the hard part of
>> > this documents is that they should be maintained e.g. updated when the
>> > code evolves so they don’t get outdated as JB mentions.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Wesley Tanaka
>> >  wrote:
>> > > These are the ones I've come across so far, are there others?
>> > >
>> > > * Dynamic DoFn https://s.apache.org/a-new-dofn
>> > >
>> > > ** Splittable DoFn (Obsoletes Source API)
>> > http://s.apache.org/splittable-do-fn
>> > >
>> > > ** State and Timers for DoFn: https://s.apache.org/beam-state
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > * Lateness https://s.apache.org/beam-lateness
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > * Metrics API http://s.apache.org/beam-metrics-api
>> > >
>> > > ** I/O Metrics https://s.apache.org/standard-io-metrics
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > * Runner API http://s.apache.org/beam-runner-api
>> > >
>> > > ** https://s.apache.org/beam-runner-composites
>> > >
>> > > ** https://s.apache.org/beam-side-inputs-1-pager
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > * Fn API http://s.apache.org/beam-fn-api
>> > >
>> > > ---
>> > > Wesley Tanaka
>> > > https://wtanaka.com/
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Monday, April 24, 2017, 2:45:45 PM HST, Sourabh Bajaj <
>> > sourabhba...@google.com.INVALID> wrote:
>> > > For 6. I think having them in one page on the website where we can
>> find
>> > the
>> > > design docs more easily would be great.
>> > >
>> > > 7. For low-hanging-fruit, one thing I really liked from some Mozilla
>> > > projects was assigning a mentor on the ticket. Someone you can reach
>> out
>> > to
>> > > if you have questions. I think this makes the entry barrier really low
>> > for
>> > > first time contributors who might feel intimidated asking questions
>> > > completely in public.
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:06 AM Kenneth Knowles
>> > > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I like the subject Etienne has brought up, and will give it a number
>> in
>> > >> this list :-)
>> > >>
>> > >> 6. Have more technical reference docs (not just workspace set up) for
>> > >> contributors.
>> > >>
>> > >> I think this overlaps a lot with a prior discussion about where to
>> > collect
>> > >> design proposals [1]. Design docs used to be just dropped into a
>> public
>> > >> folder, but that got disorganized. And that thread was about work in
>> > >> progress, so JIRA was a good place for details after a dev@ thread
>> > agrees
>> > >> on a proposal. At this point, the designs are pretty solid
>> conceptually
>> > or
>> > >> even implemented and we could start to build out deeper technical
>> bits
>> > on
>> > >> the web site, or at least some place that people can find it. We do
>> have
>> > >> the Testing Guide and the PTransform Style Guide and somewhere near
>> > there
>> > >> we could have deeper references. I think we need a broader vision for
>> > the
>> > >> "table of contents" here.
>> > >>
>> > >> For my docs (triggers, lateness, runner API, side inputs, state,
>> > coders) I
>> > >> haven't had time, but I do intend to both translate from GDoc to some
>> >

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-25 Thread Wesley Tanaka 
These are the ones I've come across so far, are there others?

* Dynamic DoFn https://s.apache.org/a-new-dofn

** Splittable DoFn (Obsoletes Source API) http://s.apache.org/splittable-do-fn

** State and Timers for DoFn: https://s.apache.org/beam-state


* Lateness https://s.apache.org/beam-lateness


* Metrics API http://s.apache.org/beam-metrics-api

** I/O Metrics https://s.apache.org/standard-io-metrics


* Runner API http://s.apache.org/beam-runner-api

** https://s.apache.org/beam-runner-composites

** https://s.apache.org/beam-side-inputs-1-pager


* Fn API http://s.apache.org/beam-fn-api 

---
Wesley Tanaka
https://wtanaka.com/


On Monday, April 24, 2017, 2:45:45 PM HST, Sourabh Bajaj 
 wrote:
For 6. I think having them in one page on the website where we can find the
design docs more easily would be great.

7. For low-hanging-fruit, one thing I really liked from some Mozilla
projects was assigning a mentor on the ticket. Someone you can reach out to
if you have questions. I think this makes the entry barrier really low for
first time contributors who might feel intimidated asking questions
completely in public.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:06 AM Kenneth Knowles 
wrote:

> I like the subject Etienne has brought up, and will give it a number in
> this list :-)
>
> 6. Have more technical reference docs (not just workspace set up) for
> contributors.
>
> I think this overlaps a lot with a prior discussion about where to collect
> design proposals [1]. Design docs used to be just dropped into a public
> folder, but that got disorganized. And that thread was about work in
> progress, so JIRA was a good place for details after a dev@ thread agrees
> on a proposal. At this point, the designs are pretty solid conceptually or
> even implemented and we could start to build out deeper technical bits on
> the web site, or at least some place that people can find it. We do have
> the Testing Guide and the PTransform Style Guide and somewhere near there
> we could have deeper references. I think we need a broader vision for the
> "table of contents" here.
>
> For my docs (triggers, lateness, runner API, side inputs, state, coders) I
> haven't had time, but I do intend to both translate from GDoc to some other
> format and also rewrite versions for users where appropriate. Probably this
> will mean coming up with that table of contents.
>
> Kenn
>
> [1]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/%3c6bc60c88-cf91-4fff-eae6-fea6ee06f...@nanthrax.net%3E
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Neelesh Salian 
> wrote:
>
> > Agreed. I have some old JIRAs that I am cleaning up.
> >
> > Thank you for bringing this up.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Same also for Slack, github comments, etc.
> > >
> > > From a Apache perspective, it should happen on the mailing list,
> > > eventually referencing a central wiki/faq/whatever.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > >
> > > On 04/24/2017 06:23 PM, Mingmin Xu wrote:
> > >
> > >> many design documents are mixed in maillist, jira comments, it would
> be
> > a
> > >> big help to put them in a centralized list. Also I would expect more
> > >> wiki/blogs to provide in-depth analysis, like the translation from
> > >> pipeline
> > >> to runner specified topology, window/trigger implementation. Without
> > these
> > >> knowledge, it's hard to touch the core concepts.
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to
> > >>> maintain ;)
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>> JB
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi JB,
> > 
> >  I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE
> > setup.
> >  The FAQ
> >  could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a
> source,
> >  how
> >  do I
> >  use it to implement an IO"
> > 
> >  Etienne
> > 
> > 
> >  Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :
> > 
> >  Hi Etienne,
> > >
> > > What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the
> > > IntelliJ
> > > and
> > > Eclipse setup sections.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.
> > >>
> > >> I might suggest another good to have:
> > >>
> > >> to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have
> some
> > >> sort of
> > >> programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to
> > >> sdk/runner/io/...
> > >> writers.
> > >>
> > >> I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google
> >

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-25 Thread Etienne Chauchot 

You're right Kenn, discussing the "table of contents" is a good start.

WDYT about having this table of contents audience and code package 
oriented? something like


1. SDK writers

1.1 Core components

1.1.1 Transforms

1.1.2 Metrics



1.2 IO components

...

2. Runner writers

1.1 Direct Runner

1.2 Flink Runner

1.3 Spark Runner



Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 19:06, Kenneth Knowles a écrit :

I like the subject Etienne has brought up, and will give it a number in
this list :-)

6. Have more technical reference docs (not just workspace set up) for
contributors.

I think this overlaps a lot with a prior discussion about where to collect
design proposals [1]. Design docs used to be just dropped into a public
folder, but that got disorganized. And that thread was about work in
progress, so JIRA was a good place for details after a dev@ thread agrees
on a proposal. At this point, the designs are pretty solid conceptually or
even implemented and we could start to build out deeper technical bits on
the web site, or at least some place that people can find it. We do have
the Testing Guide and the PTransform Style Guide and somewhere near there
we could have deeper references. I think we need a broader vision for the
"table of contents" here.

For my docs (triggers, lateness, runner API, side inputs, state, coders) I
haven't had time, but I do intend to both translate from GDoc to some other
format and also rewrite versions for users where appropriate. Probably this
will mean coming up with that table of contents.

Kenn

[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/%3c6bc60c88-cf91-4fff-eae6-fea6ee06f...@nanthrax.net%3E


On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Neelesh Salian 
wrote:


Agreed. I have some old JIRAs that I am cleaning up.

Thank you for bringing this up.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Same also for Slack, github comments, etc.

 From a Apache perspective, it should happen on the mailing list,
eventually referencing a central wiki/faq/whatever.

Regards
JB


On 04/24/2017 06:23 PM, Mingmin Xu wrote:


many design documents are mixed in maillist, jira comments, it would be

a

big help to put them in a centralized list. Also I would expect more
wiki/blogs to provide in-depth analysis, like the translation from
pipeline
to runner specified topology, window/trigger implementation. Without

these

knowledge, it's hard to touch the core concepts.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to

maintain ;)

Regards
JB


On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:

Hi JB,

I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE

setup.

The FAQ
could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a source,
how
do I
use it to implement an IO"

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi Etienne,

What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the
IntelliJ
and
Eclipse setup sections.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:

Hi all,

I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.

I might suggest another good to have:

to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some
sort of
programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to
sdk/runner/io/...
writers.

I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google
drive, the
ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe having
key points
in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for
example)
would be
interesting.

Best,

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi,

I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).

Good idea for domain of interest/concept.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:

Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest,

concept
and if it's a good "first bug".

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:


1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not

actively

working on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800).
Perhaps
some can be closed.


+1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!

Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in
tracking
issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues

than

opened
in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more

opened

than
resolved.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now,

the

Jira is

automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.


Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue.

It
wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Stephen Sisk 
general +1 to the concept, including driving down
assigned-but-not-actually-being-worked-on items.

I also really like the idea of having a mentor on tickets.

Etienne,  Re: specific help for I/Os - is the I/O Authoring docs not a good
answer? https://beam.apache.org/documentation/io/io-toc/  (or perhaps we
need to update that somehow)

S

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 5:45 PM Sourabh Bajaj
 wrote:

> For 6. I think having them in one page on the website where we can find the
> design docs more easily would be great.
>
> 7. For low-hanging-fruit, one thing I really liked from some Mozilla
> projects was assigning a mentor on the ticket. Someone you can reach out to
> if you have questions. I think this makes the entry barrier really low for
> first time contributors who might feel intimidated asking questions
> completely in public.
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:06 AM Kenneth Knowles 
> wrote:
>
> > I like the subject Etienne has brought up, and will give it a number in
> > this list :-)
> >
> > 6. Have more technical reference docs (not just workspace set up) for
> > contributors.
> >
> > I think this overlaps a lot with a prior discussion about where to
> collect
> > design proposals [1]. Design docs used to be just dropped into a public
> > folder, but that got disorganized. And that thread was about work in
> > progress, so JIRA was a good place for details after a dev@ thread
> agrees
> > on a proposal. At this point, the designs are pretty solid conceptually
> or
> > even implemented and we could start to build out deeper technical bits on
> > the web site, or at least some place that people can find it. We do have
> > the Testing Guide and the PTransform Style Guide and somewhere near there
> > we could have deeper references. I think we need a broader vision for the
> > "table of contents" here.
> >
> > For my docs (triggers, lateness, runner API, side inputs, state, coders)
> I
> > haven't had time, but I do intend to both translate from GDoc to some
> other
> > format and also rewrite versions for users where appropriate. Probably
> this
> > will mean coming up with that table of contents.
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/%3c6bc60c88-cf91-4fff-eae6-fea6ee06f...@nanthrax.net%3E
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Neelesh Salian <
> neeleshssal...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Agreed. I have some old JIRAs that I am cleaning up.
> > >
> > > Thank you for bringing this up.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Same also for Slack, github comments, etc.
> > > >
> > > > From a Apache perspective, it should happen on the mailing list,
> > > > eventually referencing a central wiki/faq/whatever.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 04/24/2017 06:23 PM, Mingmin Xu wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> many design documents are mixed in maillist, jira comments, it would
> > be
> > > a
> > > >> big help to put them in a centralized list. Also I would expect more
> > > >> wiki/blogs to provide in-depth analysis, like the translation from
> > > >> pipeline
> > > >> to runner specified topology, window/trigger implementation. Without
> > > these
> > > >> knowledge, it's hard to touch the core concepts.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to
> > > >>> maintain ;)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards
> > > >>> JB
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hi JB,
> > > 
> > >  I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE
> > > setup.
> > >  The FAQ
> > >  could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a
> > source,
> > >  how
> > >  do I
> > >  use it to implement an IO"
> > > 
> > >  Etienne
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :
> > > 
> > >  Hi Etienne,
> > > >
> > > > What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the
> > > > IntelliJ
> > > > and
> > > > Eclipse setup sections.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >>
> > > >> I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.
> > > >>
> > > >> I might suggest another good to have:
> > > >>
> > > >> to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have
> > some
> > > >> sort of
> > > >> programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to
> > > >> sdk/runner/io/...
> > > >> writers.
> > > >>
> > > >> I know that new contributors have the docs available in the
> google
> > > >> drive, the
> > > >> ML, the code

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Sourabh Bajaj 
For 6. I think having them in one page on the website where we can find the
design docs more easily would be great.

7. For low-hanging-fruit, one thing I really liked from some Mozilla
projects was assigning a mentor on the ticket. Someone you can reach out to
if you have questions. I think this makes the entry barrier really low for
first time contributors who might feel intimidated asking questions
completely in public.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:06 AM Kenneth Knowles 
wrote:

> I like the subject Etienne has brought up, and will give it a number in
> this list :-)
>
> 6. Have more technical reference docs (not just workspace set up) for
> contributors.
>
> I think this overlaps a lot with a prior discussion about where to collect
> design proposals [1]. Design docs used to be just dropped into a public
> folder, but that got disorganized. And that thread was about work in
> progress, so JIRA was a good place for details after a dev@ thread agrees
> on a proposal. At this point, the designs are pretty solid conceptually or
> even implemented and we could start to build out deeper technical bits on
> the web site, or at least some place that people can find it. We do have
> the Testing Guide and the PTransform Style Guide and somewhere near there
> we could have deeper references. I think we need a broader vision for the
> "table of contents" here.
>
> For my docs (triggers, lateness, runner API, side inputs, state, coders) I
> haven't had time, but I do intend to both translate from GDoc to some other
> format and also rewrite versions for users where appropriate. Probably this
> will mean coming up with that table of contents.
>
> Kenn
>
> [1]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/%3c6bc60c88-cf91-4fff-eae6-fea6ee06f...@nanthrax.net%3E
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Neelesh Salian 
> wrote:
>
> > Agreed. I have some old JIRAs that I am cleaning up.
> >
> > Thank you for bringing this up.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Same also for Slack, github comments, etc.
> > >
> > > From a Apache perspective, it should happen on the mailing list,
> > > eventually referencing a central wiki/faq/whatever.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > >
> > > On 04/24/2017 06:23 PM, Mingmin Xu wrote:
> > >
> > >> many design documents are mixed in maillist, jira comments, it would
> be
> > a
> > >> big help to put them in a centralized list. Also I would expect more
> > >> wiki/blogs to provide in-depth analysis, like the translation from
> > >> pipeline
> > >> to runner specified topology, window/trigger implementation. Without
> > these
> > >> knowledge, it's hard to touch the core concepts.
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to
> > >>> maintain ;)
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>> JB
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi JB,
> > 
> >  I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE
> > setup.
> >  The FAQ
> >  could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a
> source,
> >  how
> >  do I
> >  use it to implement an IO"
> > 
> >  Etienne
> > 
> > 
> >  Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :
> > 
> >  Hi Etienne,
> > >
> > > What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the
> > > IntelliJ
> > > and
> > > Eclipse setup sections.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.
> > >>
> > >> I might suggest another good to have:
> > >>
> > >> to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have
> some
> > >> sort of
> > >> programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to
> > >> sdk/runner/io/...
> > >> writers.
> > >>
> > >> I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google
> > >> drive, the
> > >> ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe
> having
> > >> key points
> > >> in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for
> > >> example)
> > >> would be
> > >> interesting.
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >>
> > >> Etienne
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).
> > >>>
> > >>> Good idea for domain of interest/concept.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>> JB
> > >>>
> > >>> On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Might I suggest adding

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 

Same also for Slack, github comments, etc.

From a Apache perspective, it should happen on the mailing list, eventually 
referencing a central wiki/faq/whatever.


Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 06:23 PM, Mingmin Xu wrote:

many design documents are mixed in maillist, jira comments, it would be a
big help to put them in a centralized list. Also I would expect more
wiki/blogs to provide in-depth analysis, like the translation from pipeline
to runner specified topology, window/trigger implementation. Without these
knowledge, it's hard to touch the core concepts.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to
maintain ;)

Regards
JB


On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:


Hi JB,

I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE setup.
The FAQ
could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a source, how
do I
use it to implement an IO"

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :


Hi Etienne,

What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the IntelliJ
and
Eclipse setup sections.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:


Hi all,

I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.

I might suggest another good to have:

to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some
sort of
programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to
sdk/runner/io/...
writers.

I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google
drive, the
ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe having
key points
in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for example)
would be
interesting.

Best,

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :


Hi,

I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).

Good idea for domain of interest/concept.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:


Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest,
concept
and if it's a good "first bug".

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:



1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
working on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800).
Perhaps
some can be closed.



+1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!

Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in
tracking
issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues than
opened
in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more opened
than
resolved.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the
Jira is


automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.



Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. It
wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance
somebody
will actually help.

Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, etc.
-- but
that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of a
lot of
issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more unassigned
issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just sets a
community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does
help move
things along!

I think a better approach of addressing the current state would be
increase
the number of components / component leads. With more people
involved and
lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective.












--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com







--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Mingmin Xu 
many design documents are mixed in maillist, jira comments, it would be a
big help to put them in a centralized list. Also I would expect more
wiki/blogs to provide in-depth analysis, like the translation from pipeline
to runner specified topology, window/trigger implementation. Without these
knowledge, it's hard to touch the core concepts.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to
> maintain ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
>
>> Hi JB,
>>
>> I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE setup.
>> The FAQ
>> could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a source, how
>> do I
>> use it to implement an IO"
>>
>> Etienne
>>
>>
>> Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi Etienne,
>>>
>>> What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the IntelliJ
>>> and
>>> Eclipse setup sections.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:
>>>
 Hi all,

 I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.

 I might suggest another good to have:

 to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some
 sort of
 programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to
 sdk/runner/io/...
 writers.

 I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google
 drive, the
 ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe having
 key points
 in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for example)
 would be
 interesting.

 Best,

 Etienne


 Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).
>
> Good idea for domain of interest/concept.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:
>
>> Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest,
>> concept
>> and if it's a good "first bug".
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:
>>
>>
 1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
 working on.
 2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
 descriptions and raising concerns.
 3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800).
 Perhaps
 some can be closed.


>>> +1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!
>>>
>>> Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in
>>> tracking
>>> issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues than
>>> opened
>>> in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more opened
>>> than
>>> resolved.
>>>
>>> I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the
>>> Jira is
>>>
 automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.


>>> Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. It
>>> wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance
>>> somebody
>>> will actually help.
>>>
>>> Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, etc.
>>> -- but
>>> that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of a
>>> lot of
>>> issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more unassigned
>>> issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just sets a
>>> community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does
>>> help move
>>> things along!
>>>
>>> I think a better approach of addressing the current state would be
>>> increase
>>> the number of components / component leads. With more people
>>> involved and
>>> lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective.
>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>



-- 

Mingmin

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 

Got it. By experience on other Apache projects, it's really hard to maintain ;)

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 02:56 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:

Hi JB,

I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE setup. The FAQ
could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a source, how do I
use it to implement an IO"

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi Etienne,

What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the IntelliJ and
Eclipse setup sections.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:

Hi all,

I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.

I might suggest another good to have:

to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some sort of
programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to sdk/runner/io/...
writers.

I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google drive, the
ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe having key points
in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for example) would be
interesting.

Best,

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi,

I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).

Good idea for domain of interest/concept.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:

Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest, concept
and if it's a good "first bug".

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:



1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
working on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
some can be closed.



+1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!

Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in tracking
issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues than opened
in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more opened than
resolved.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the Jira is

automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.



Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. It
wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance somebody
will actually help.

Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, etc. -- but
that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of a lot of
issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more unassigned
issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just sets a
community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does help move
things along!

I think a better approach of addressing the current state would be increase
the number of components / component leads. With more people involved and
lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective.










--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Etienne Chauchot 

Hi JB,

I was proposing a FAQ (or another form), not something about IDE setup. 
The FAQ could group in the same place Q/A like for example "what is a 
source, how do I use it to implement an IO"


Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 14:19, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi Etienne,

What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the 
IntelliJ and Eclipse setup sections.


Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:

Hi all,

I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.

I might suggest another good to have:

to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some 
sort of
programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to 
sdk/runner/io/...

writers.

I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google 
drive, the
ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe having 
key points
in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for 
example) would be

interesting.

Best,

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi,

I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).

Good idea for domain of interest/concept.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:
Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest, 
concept

and if it's a good "first bug".

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:



1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
working on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). 
Perhaps

some can be closed.



+1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!

Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in 
tracking
issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues than 
opened
in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more 
opened than

resolved.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, 
the Jira is

automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.



Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. It
wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance 
somebody

will actually help.

Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, etc. 
-- but
that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of a 
lot of

issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more unassigned
issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just sets a
community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does 
help move

things along!

I think a better approach of addressing the current state would be 
increase
the number of components / component leads. With more people 
involved and

lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 

Hi Etienne,

What about the contribution guide ? I think it's covered in the IntelliJ and 
Eclipse setup sections.


Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 02:12 PM, Etienne Chauchot wrote:

Hi all,

I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.

I might suggest another good to have:

to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some sort of
programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to sdk/runner/io/...
writers.

I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google drive, the
ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe having key points
in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... writers, for example) would be
interesting.

Best,

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi,

I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).

Good idea for domain of interest/concept.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:

Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest, concept
and if it's a good "first bug".

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:



1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
working on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
some can be closed.



+1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!

Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in tracking
issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues than opened
in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more opened than
resolved.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the Jira is

automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.



Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. It
wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance somebody
will actually help.

Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, etc. -- but
that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of a lot of
issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more unassigned
issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just sets a
community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does help move
things along!

I think a better approach of addressing the current state would be increase
the number of components / component leads. With more people involved and
lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective.






--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Etienne Chauchot 

Hi all,

I definitely agree with everything that is said in this thread.

I might suggest another good to have:

to ease the work of a new contributor, it would be nice to have some 
sort of programming guide but not oriented to pipeline writers but to 
sdk/runner/io/... writers.


I know that new contributors have the docs available in the google 
drive, the ML, the code base, and the availability of beamers, but maybe 
having key points in a common place (like FAQ for sdk/runner/io/... 
writers, for example) would be interesting.


Best,

Etienne


Le 24/04/2017 à 09:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :

Hi,

I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).

Good idea for domain of interest/concept.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:
Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest, 
concept and if it's a good "first bug".


Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:



1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
working on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). 
Perhaps

some can be closed.



+1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!

Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in tracking
issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues than 
opened
in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more opened 
than

resolved.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the 
Jira is

automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.



Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. It
wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance 
somebody

will actually help.

Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, etc. 
-- but
that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of a 
lot of

issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more unassigned
issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just sets a
community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does 
help move

things along!

I think a better approach of addressing the current state would be 
increase
the number of components / component leads. With more people 
involved and

lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 

Hi Ismaël,

Honestly, for 4, I think it's not so bad and we clearly improved in the past 
months. It's definitely an area where we have to keep improving, but I think we 
do a good job (especially comparing to other projects).


For 5, agree. For example, I limit myself to 3 or 4 pull requests: that's why I 
have more than 10 local branches waiting.


Regards
JB

On 04/23/2017 10:16 PM, Ismaël Mejía wrote:

+1 Great idea Aviem, thanks for bringing this subject to the mailing list.

I agree in particular with the freeing JIRA part, I think we shouldn’t
keep assigned JIRAs that are things that we don’t expect to solve in
the next weeks. (note the exception for this are the long features).

I would add two more issues.

4. We need to react and review code faster for new contributors and
belp them as much as we can.

I know that this one implies extra work but I have seen many times
people asking for reviews days after they create a PR and even worse,
people who have not been able to merge their changes because they were
dealing with a long code review and then a different PR already
included changes that fixed the same issue.

5. We should try to keep the number of open pull requests low.

Our average number of open Pull Requests is continuously increasing
(current average is 70), There are some PRs in open discussion but
some are clearly stagnated , maybe we should have like a deadline,
like if no discussions or improvements were done in the last month we
must close them and if there is still interest well they will be
re-opened in that case.

The ‘good news’ is that we have 350 unassigned unresolved issues that
anyone can take this is a good improvement but I agree that we can do
better.

Ismaël


On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:

Hi,

as we already discussed about that, +1.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the Jira is
automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.

Regards
JB


On 04/22/2017 04:31 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:


Hi all,

I wanted to start a discussion about actions we can take to encourage more
contributions to the project.

A few points I've been thinking of:

1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
working
on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions
and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
some can be closed.

Thoughts? Ideas?



--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Ismaël Mejía 
+1 Great idea Aviem, thanks for bringing this subject to the mailing list.

I agree in particular with the freeing JIRA part, I think we shouldn’t
keep assigned JIRAs that are things that we don’t expect to solve in
the next weeks. (note the exception for this are the long features).

I would add two more issues.

4. We need to react and review code faster for new contributors and
belp them as much as we can.

I know that this one implies extra work but I have seen many times
people asking for reviews days after they create a PR and even worse,
people who have not been able to merge their changes because they were
dealing with a long code review and then a different PR already
included changes that fixed the same issue.

5. We should try to keep the number of open pull requests low.

Our average number of open Pull Requests is continuously increasing
(current average is 70), There are some PRs in open discussion but
some are clearly stagnated , maybe we should have like a deadline,
like if no discussions or improvements were done in the last month we
must close them and if there is still interest well they will be
re-opened in that case.

The ‘good news’ is that we have 350 unassigned unresolved issues that
anyone can take this is a good improvement but I agree that we can do
better.

Ismaël


On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as we already discussed about that, +1.
>
> I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the Jira is
> automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 04/22/2017 04:31 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I wanted to start a discussion about actions we can take to encourage more
>> contributions to the project.
>>
>> A few points I've been thinking of:
>>
>> 1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
>> working
>> on.
>> 2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
>> descriptions
>> and raising concerns.
>> 3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
>> some can be closed.
>>
>> Thoughts? Ideas?
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-24 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 

Hi,

I think we already tag the newbie jira ("low hanging fruit" ;)).

Good idea for domain of interest/concept.

Regards
JB

On 04/24/2017 09:01 AM, Ankur Chauhan wrote:

Might I suggest adding tags to projects based on area of intetest, concept and if it's a 
good "first bug".

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 23, 2017, at 23:03, Davor Bonaci  wrote:



1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
working on.
2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
descriptions and raising concerns.
3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
some can be closed.



+1 on all three of these, and will do my part shortly!

Also, it is worth noting that we have improved as a project in tracking
issues in the last 1-2 months. There are more resolved issues than opened
in this period, whereas in the past we'd have a hundred more opened than
resolved.

I would also propose to not assign new Jira automatically: now, the Jira is

automatically assigned to the Jira component leader.



Imagine a user discovering an issue and filing a new JIRA issue. It
wouldn't be assigned to anyone, significantly reducing the chance somebody
will actually help.

Of course, somebody could search for new issues periodically, etc. -- but
that just won't happen. The final outcome would be -- instead of a lot of
issues assigned to component leads, we'd have (much) more unassigned
issues, which were *never* looked at. Assigning an issue just sets a
community expectation that a committer should look -- and it does help move
things along!

I think a better approach of addressing the current state would be increase
the number of components / component leads. With more people involved and
lower per-person load, I think we'd be more effective.


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-22 Thread tarush grover 
Hi All,

I can take few things. I have planned to contribute towards beam SQL DSL
but members can assign more things and will be happy to contribute towards
those tasks.

Regards,
Tarush

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 at 8:40 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:

> Good point, could also disable the auto assignment when creating JIRA
> ticket. Now it goes to component leader directly.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Apr 22, 2017, at 7:34 AM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> >> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Aviem Zur  wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I wanted to start a discussion about actions we can take to encourage
> more
> >> contributions to the project.
> >>
> >> A few points I've been thinking of:
> >>
> >> 1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively
> working
> >> on.
> >> 2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets
> descriptions
> >> and raising concerns.
> >> 3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
> >> some can be closed.
> >>
> >> Thoughts? Ideas?
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-22 Thread Mingmin Xu 
Good point, could also disable the auto assignment when creating JIRA ticket. 
Now it goes to component leader directly.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 22, 2017, at 7:34 AM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Aviem Zur  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I wanted to start a discussion about actions we can take to encourage more
>> contributions to the project.
>> 
>> A few points I've been thinking of:
>> 
>> 1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively working
>> on.
>> 2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets descriptions
>> and raising concerns.
>> 3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
>> some can be closed.
>> 
>> Thoughts? Ideas?
>>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Encouraging more contributions

2017-04-22 Thread Ted Yu 
+1

On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Aviem Zur  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I wanted to start a discussion about actions we can take to encourage more
> contributions to the project.
>
> A few points I've been thinking of:
>
> 1. Have people unassign themselves from issues they're not actively working
> on.
> 2. Have the community engage more in triage, improving tickets descriptions
> and raising concerns.
> 3. Clean house - apply (2) to currently open issues (over 800). Perhaps
> some can be closed.
>
> Thoughts? Ideas?
>