RE: [DISCUSS] SAMZA-1141 - Apache Samza Development Process Improvements

Very much in favour of the proposed SEP process -- strong +1 from me. -Original Message- From: Navina Ramesh (Apache) [mailto:nav...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:16 PM To: dev@samza.apache.org Subject: [DISCUSS] SAMZA-1141 - Apache Samza Development Process Improvements

Re: [DISCUSS] SAMZA-1141 - Apache Samza Development Process Improvements

Xinyu, I considered doing that as an example. But I want to keep SEP to be only for technical discussions and not process related proposals. Navina On Mar 14, 2017 17:23, "xinyu liu" wrote: > +1 on this proposal too. Could you actually put this proposal as the first >

Re: [DISCUSS] SAMZA-1141 - Apache Samza Development Process Improvements

+1 on this proposal too. Could you actually put this proposal as the first SEP (like SEP-0), so it serves an example of how it will look like in practice? Xinyu On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Navina Ramesh wrote: > Just to clarify: The proposal for code and

Re: [DISCUSS] SAMZA-1141 - Apache Samza Development Process Improvements

Just to clarify: The proposal for code and design process change is attached as a PDF/markdown to the JIRA - SAMZA-1141. Also, please show your support specifically for code and design process. My bad for not calling it out earlier :) Thanks! Navina On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Jagadish

Re: [DISCUSS] SAMZA-1141 - Apache Samza Development Process Improvements

Thanks for writing this up. I'm +1 on this proposal. On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Navina Ramesh (Apache) wrote: > Hi everyone, > > We switched to using Pull Requests for code reviews a few months back. > Clearly, there are some drawbacks to that model and we are trying