I'm all for using pull requests and trying to push contributors that
direction. I think it is a better experience overall and makes small
reviews much easier. You also never forget to add files from a patch. :)
For issues, I would lean toward continuing to use JIRA as well, but that
isn't a
1) Yes I agree on using the GitHub for code review.
2) And if we wish to actively encourage it, we would need to update our
contribution wiki.
3) Also, I dont want to stop people from submitting patches, so for the
time being I would say lets keep both running.
4) I would say, lets continue to use
Hi folks!
Infra now offers read/write access to github via a service called
'gitbox'[1]. PMCs have the option to join the service and then make
use of whichever github features they want.
Personally, I find PR management via the github interface way faster
than other options. In particular,
Hi Joseph!
The best way to help increase the speed of things getting reviewed is
to spend a few minutes reviewing other contributions. It makes it much
faster for committers to review something when someone else has taken
a look at it already.
AVRO-1961 looks like a great improvement, but I'm
Up ^^
Review, integration in 1.8.2 or comments welcome ^^
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Joseph P. wrote:
> Hi
>
> AVRO-1961 [1] comes with a pull request [2] containing tests and AFAIK is
> fit for merging. If you've any comment don't hesitate :)
>
> It adds the
Is there a JIRA for Matthieu Monsch proposal of writer aliases?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-avro.679487.n3.nabble.com/Avro-union-compatibility-mode-enhancement-proposal-tp4034377p4037426.html
Sent from the Avro - Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Pieter Dekinder created AVRO-2032:
-
Summary: Unable to decode JSON-encoded Double.NaN,
Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY or Double.NEGATIVE_INFINITY
Key: AVRO-2032
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2032