+1
I also suggest add reviewer list link to the PR template, so that
developers can easily request review from those reviewers.
On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 8:30 PM Tianqi Chen wrote:
>
> I was suggesting something more concrete:
>
> - Add a Reviewers section to
>
Hello,
FYI, GitHub is currently having a service disruption which results in their
databases not acting consistent. For me, this impaired creating issues and
pull requests - they have been created with a proper ID, but they are not
available with a subsequent request. This might also impair the
+1
Let's have a reviewer list somewhere with a certain format: such as C++, Gluon,
Scala/Java based on language or some other category. etc. In the future, label
bot would automatically assign reviewers based on this kind of documentation.
Thanks,
Qing
On 10/21/18, 11:44 PM, "YiZhi Liu"
I want to clarify that this would not prevent Amazon contributors from
being nominated. Nor it would prevent collaboration between Amazon
employees. A good thing about Apache is that everything is recorded and
presented to the entire community, this includes the dev list,
github review/commit
I want to clarify that this would not prevent Amazon contributors from
being nominated. Nor it would prevent collaboration between Amazon
employees. A good thing about Apache is that everything is recorded and
presented to the entire community, this includes the dev list,
github review/commit
Hey Sergio, I think it's mostly to keep the Dockerfile size down by
matching the system python package. Of course people can extend the image
and use python 3.6 / 3.7. I think we should follow this up with an update
to the new Ubuntu LTS version as a base docker image at which point it
would use
-1. I dont see the need for additional level of hierarchy. I totally am for
recognizing good code reviewers. We can recognize this by making them
committers. Being a good reviewer should be sufficient to become a
committer in my opinion. (Assuming that there is a seperation between PPMC
and
I think your last word you meant "reviewers", right?
yeah, this was also my understanding. A new "below-committer" level called
"reviewer". So 3 levels now...
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:50 PM Tianqi Chen wrote:
> To be clear, we are not splitting the committers into reviewers, we are
>
Thanks Steffen helping draft up the proposal for Committer and PPMC
guidelines.
Please everyone review and provide feedback
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Become+an+Apache+MXNet+(incubating)+Committer+and+PPMC+Member+Proposal
.
I plan to start a vote on this Friday if the
To be clear, we are not splitting the committers into reviewers, we are
recognizing an additional set of contributors who could become potential
committers and recognizing them as committers
Tianqi
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:23 PM Chris Olivier wrote:
> Are there any other major Apache projects
The situation most projects are facing(including us), is lack of code
reviews. Code reviews are the most important part of the project, and
high-quality reviews are extremely time-consuming, maybe as much as so
as the code itself. Usually, it is only committers do the code reviews, the
code
Are there any other major Apache projects which have this designation? I
am always continually suspicious of efforts to reinvent Apache rules from
other non-Apache projects, when Apache projects have historically been
quite successful within the Apache platform. In fact, operating outside of
12 matches
Mail list logo
