incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator
Date Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:26:12 GMT
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Branko ─îibej <> wrote:

> >> Concerns have been raised about the people behind the actual commits,
> that
> >> seems to be left open ?
> > I am not sure about this one: why there's a concern that people behind
> commits
> > aren't the same ppl as making the fixes? Am I reading this right?
> I think there are a couple things to consider here:
>  1. Off-list discussions, and commits made based on such discussions:
>     There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. The resultant code is
>     public and can be reviewed. If the reasons behind a change are not
>     clear, well, it's up to the devs to document the code and/or explain
>     on the dev@ list; but forbidding off-list discussions implies
>     forbidding hackathons and ApacheCons, for example.

My question was more to do with losing historical detail by squashing
commits.  Squashing commits has the tendency to hide contributions as
well.  I think we have a good answer for that.

As far as off-list discussions are concerned, this is still a very big
issue for me.  Off-list discussions and design work is not forbidden, but
it must be reflected back to the mailing list.

This issue has come up many times.  For instance, with Apache Drill, the
initial team was highly MapR-centric.  This inevitably meant that people
talked at lunch or because they sat next to each other.  A first step to
broaden this discussion and to even the playing field in terms of face to
face communication was to institute a weekly video meeting open to
everybody via Google hangouts. These meetings are archived, I believe, and
there have been over a hundred of them so far.

But as good as that outreach was, there was considerable criticism on this
same mailing list that hangouts were only OK if the content discussed was
either informational (so information travels from the mailing list to the
hangouts) or if design decisions were discussed that the discussions were
summarized back to the list.  Doing this consistently takes considerable
effort because it is fairly natural to simply move forward.

With perspective, I think that the criticisms and the resulting changes in
process in the Drill project were extremely helpful and they make the
project better and more approachable.

With Ignite, I worry that such discussions are happening (they must be, by
geography and time zone alone) but are not being reflected back to the
mailing list or to the JIRA.  It is not even clear when a bug is closed
whether there was a code fix or not.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message