[DISCUSS] [Contributing] (2) - Review Steps

[Fabian Hueske-2]

Hi,

I merged the PR.
The review process is documented at [1].

Best, Fabian

[1] https://flink.apache.org/reviewing-prs.html

Am Mi., 10. Okt. 2018 um 17:48 Uhr schrieb Fabian Hueske <[hidden email]
>:

> Hi all,
>
> I opened a PR [1] to add the PR review guide to the Flink website.
>
> Cheers, Fabian
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pull/126
>
> Am Mi., 10. Okt. 2018 um 17:27 Uhr schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <
> [hidden email]>:
>
>> +1
>>
>> > On 9. Oct 2018, at 17:11, Hequn Cheng <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 3:25 PM Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999)
>> >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> +1
>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> 发件人：vino yang <[hidden email]>
>> >>> 发送时间：2018年10月9日(星期二) 14:08
>> >>> 收件人：dev <[hidden email]>
>> >>> 主 题：Re: [DISCUSS] [Contributing] (2) - Review Steps
>> >>>
>> >>> +1
>> >>>
>> >>> Peter Huang <[hidden email]> 于2018年10月9日周二 下午1:54写道：
>> >>>
>> >>>> +1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:47 PM Thomas Weise <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> +1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:36 PM Tzu-Li Chen <[hidden email]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Jin Sun <[hidden email]> 于2018年10月9日周二 上午2:10写道：
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> +1, look forward to see the change.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2018, at 12:07 AM, Fabian Hueske <[hidden email]>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Since we have addressed all comments (please raise your voice
>> >> if
>> >>>>>> not!), I
>> >>>>>>>> would like to move forward and convert the proposal [1] into a
>> >>> page
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>> Flink's website [2].
>> >>>>>>>> I will create a pull request against the website repo [3].
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Once the page got merged, we can start posting the review form
>> >> on
>> >>>> new
>> >>>>>>> pull
>> >>>>>>>> requests.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Best, Fabian
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [1]
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yaX2b9LNh-6LxrAmE23U3D2cRbocGlGKCYnvJd9lVhk
>> >>>>>>>> [2] https://flink.apache.org
>> >>>>>>>> [3] https://github.com/apache/flink-web
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 17:56 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <
>> >>>>>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>>>>>> :
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Chesnay that we don't guarantee (quick) review
>> >> of a
>> >>>> PR
>> >>>>> at
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> project level. As ASF statement[1]:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Please show some patience with the developers if your patch
>> >> is
>> >>>> not
>> >>>>>>>>> applied as fast as you'd like or a developer asks you to make
>> >>>>> changes
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> the patch. If you do not receive any feedback in a reasonable
>> >>>> amount
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> time (say a week or two), feel free to send a follow-up e-mail
>> >>> to
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> developer list. Open Source developers are all volunteers,
>> >> often
>> >>>>> doing
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> development in their spare time.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> However, an open source community shows its friendliness to
>> >>>>>>> contributors.
>> >>>>>>>>> Thus contributors believe their contribution would be take
>> >> care
>> >>>> of,
>> >>>>>>> even be
>> >>>>>>>>> rejected with a reason; project members are thought kind to
>> >>>> provide
>> >>>>>>> help to
>> >>>>>>>>> the process.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Just like this thread kicked off, it is glad to see that Flink
>> >>>>>> community
>> >>>>>>>>> try best to help its contributors and committers, then take
>> >>>>> advantage
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> "open source".
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Best,
>> >>>>>>>>> tison.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/contributors#patches
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Chesnay Schepler <[hidden email]> 于2018年9月25日周二
>> >> 下午11:21写道：
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> There is no guarantee that a PR will be looked at nor is it
>> >>>>> possible
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>> provide this in any way on the project level.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> As far as Apache is concerned all contributors/committers
>> >> etc.
>> >>>> work
>> >>>>>>>>>> voluntarily, and
>> >>>>>>>>>> as such assigning work (which includes ownership if it
>> >> implies
>> >>>>> such)
>> >>>>>> or
>> >>>>>>>>>> similar is simply not feasible.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On 25.09.2018 16:54, Thomas Weise wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think that all discussion/coordination related to a
>> >>>>> contribution /
>> >>>>>>> PR
>> >>>>>>>>>>> should be handled through the official project channel.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would also prefer that there are no designated "owners"
>> >> and
>> >>>>>>>>> "experts",
>> >>>>>>>>>>> for the reasons Fabian mentioned.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ideally there is no need to have "suggested reviewers"
>> >> either,
>> >>>> but
>> >>>>>>> then
>> >>>>>>>>>>> what will be the process to ensure that PRs will be looked
>> >> at?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thomas
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:17 AM Tzu-Li Chen <
>> >>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Fabian,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You convinced me. I miss the advantage we can take from
>> >>> mailing
>> >>>>>>> lists.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now I am of the same opinion.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> tison.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Fabian Hueske <[hidden email]> 于2018年9月25日周二 下午3:01写道：
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think questions about Flink should be posted on the
>> >> public
>> >>>>>> mailing
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> lists
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of asking just a single expert.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> There's many reasons for that:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * usually more than one person can answer the question
>> >> (what
>> >>>> if
>> >>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> expert
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is not available?)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * non-committers can join the discussion and contribute to
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>> community
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (how can they become experts otherwise?)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * the knowledge is shared on the mailing list (helps in
>> >>> cases
>> >>>>> when
>> >>>>>>>>> only
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> one
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> person can answer the question)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Last but not least, my concern is that committers for
>> >>> popular
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> contribution
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> areas would be flooded with requests.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Even without being listed as a "component expert", I
>> >> cannot
>> >>>>> handle
>> >>>>>>>>> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> review requests directed at me.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I work on issues (PR reviews, my contributions,
>> >> discussions)
>> >>>>> that
>> >>>>>> I
>> >>>>>>>>>> deem
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> important and being constantly pinged does not really help
>> >>> to
>> >>>>>> speed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> things
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> up.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> There are of course cases when it is important to be
>> >>> notified,
>> >>>>> but
>> >>>>>>>>> IMO
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> chances that those get the right attention decrease with
>> >> the
>> >>>>>> number
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> requests.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, Fabian
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 04:10 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for start the discussion Stephan!
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (1) Do we agree on the five basic steps below?*
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to the five steps and making the third question in the
>> >>>>>> proposal
>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> first.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (2) How do we understand that consensus is reached about
>> >>>> adding
>> >>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to lazy consensus with one committer's +1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (3) To answer the question whether a PR needs special
>> >>>> attention
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contributor can ask for special attention, which is
>> >> treated
>> >>>> as
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggestion.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Committer can ask for another committers' attention,
>> >> either
>> >>>> for
>> >>>>>>>>> advice
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> transfer
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right of decision.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO it is quite help to add a page about "component
>> >>> experts",
>> >>>>>>> attach
>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> link  it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> from README. This would be a really helpful information
>> >> to
>> >>>> new
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so that they know to whom he can cc or ask for advice.
>> >>>> Besides
>> >>>>> it
>> >>>>>>>>>> would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be helpful for those who want to know more about the
>> >>>> mechanism
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> underneath
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Flink, now they know with whom they can consult.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tison.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>

[Till Rohrmann]

Thanks a lot for merging and publishing the new review guidelines Fabian!

Cheers,
Till

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 10:22 AM Fabian Hueske <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I merged the PR.
> The review process is documented at [1].
>
> Best, Fabian
>
> [1] https://flink.apache.org/reviewing-prs.html
>
> Am Mi., 10. Okt. 2018 um 17:48 Uhr schrieb Fabian Hueske <
> [hidden email]
> >:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I opened a PR [1] to add the PR review guide to the Flink website.
> >
> > Cheers, Fabian
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pull/126
> >
> > Am Mi., 10. Okt. 2018 um 17:27 Uhr schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <
> > [hidden email]>:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> > On 9. Oct 2018, at 17:11, Hequn Cheng <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > +1
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 3:25 PM Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> +1
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999)
> >> >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> +1
> >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> 发件人：vino yang <[hidden email]>
> >> >>> 发送时间：2018年10月9日(星期二) 14:08
> >> >>> 收件人：dev <[hidden email]>
> >> >>> 主 题：Re: [DISCUSS] [Contributing] (2) - Review Steps
> >> >>>
> >> >>> +1
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Peter Huang <[hidden email]> 于2018年10月9日周二 下午1:54写道：
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> +1
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:47 PM Thomas Weise <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> +1
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:36 PM Tzu-Li Chen <[hidden email]>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> +1
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Jin Sun <[hidden email]> 于2018年10月9日周二 上午2:10写道：
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> +1, look forward to see the change.
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2018, at 12:07 AM, Fabian Hueske <[hidden email]>
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Since we have addressed all comments (please raise your voice
> >> >> if
> >> >>>>>> not!), I
> >> >>>>>>>> would like to move forward and convert the proposal [1] into a
> >> >>> page
> >> >>>>> for
> >> >>>>>>>> Flink's website [2].
> >> >>>>>>>> I will create a pull request against the website repo [3].
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Once the page got merged, we can start posting the review form
> >> >> on
> >> >>>> new
> >> >>>>>>> pull
> >> >>>>>>>> requests.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Best, Fabian
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> [1]
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yaX2b9LNh-6LxrAmE23U3D2cRbocGlGKCYnvJd9lVhk
> >> >>>>>>>> [2] https://flink.apache.org
> >> >>>>>>>> [3] https://github.com/apache/flink-web
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 17:56 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <
> >> >>>>>>> [hidden email]
> >> >>>>>>>>> :
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Chesnay that we don't guarantee (quick) review
> >> >> of a
> >> >>>> PR
> >> >>>>> at
> >> >>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>> project level. As ASF statement[1]:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Please show some patience with the developers if your patch
> >> >> is
> >> >>>> not
> >> >>>>>>>>> applied as fast as you'd like or a developer asks you to make
> >> >>>>> changes
> >> >>>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>>>> the patch. If you do not receive any feedback in a reasonable
> >> >>>> amount
> >> >>>>>> of
> >> >>>>>>>>> time (say a week or two), feel free to send a follow-up e-mail
> >> >>> to
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>> developer list. Open Source developers are all volunteers,
> >> >> often
> >> >>>>> doing
> >> >>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>> development in their spare time.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> However, an open source community shows its friendliness to
> >> >>>>>>> contributors.
> >> >>>>>>>>> Thus contributors believe their contribution would be take
> >> >> care
> >> >>>> of,
> >> >>>>>>> even be
> >> >>>>>>>>> rejected with a reason; project members are thought kind to
> >> >>>> provide
> >> >>>>>>> help to
> >> >>>>>>>>> the process.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Just like this thread kicked off, it is glad to see that Flink
> >> >>>>>> community
> >> >>>>>>>>> try best to help its contributors and committers, then take
> >> >>>>> advantage
> >> >>>>>> of
> >> >>>>>>>>> "open source".
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Best,
> >> >>>>>>>>> tison.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/contributors#patches
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Chesnay Schepler <[hidden email]> 于2018年9月25日周二
> >> >> 下午11:21写道：
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> There is no guarantee that a PR will be looked at nor is it
> >> >>>>> possible
> >> >>>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>>>>> provide this in any way on the project level.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> As far as Apache is concerned all contributors/committers
> >> >> etc.
> >> >>>> work
> >> >>>>>>>>>> voluntarily, and
> >> >>>>>>>>>> as such assigning work (which includes ownership if it
> >> >> implies
> >> >>>>> such)
> >> >>>>>> or
> >> >>>>>>>>>> similar is simply not feasible.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> On 25.09.2018 16:54, Thomas Weise wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I think that all discussion/coordination related to a
> >> >>>>> contribution /
> >> >>>>>>> PR
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> should be handled through the official project channel.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I would also prefer that there are no designated "owners"
> >> >> and
> >> >>>>>>>>> "experts",
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> for the reasons Fabian mentioned.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Ideally there is no need to have "suggested reviewers"
> >> >> either,
> >> >>>> but
> >> >>>>>>> then
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> what will be the process to ensure that PRs will be looked
> >> >> at?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thomas
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:17 AM Tzu-Li Chen <
> >> >>>> [hidden email]
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Fabian,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> You convinced me. I miss the advantage we can take from
> >> >>> mailing
> >> >>>>>>> lists.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now I am of the same opinion.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> tison.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Fabian Hueske <[hidden email]> 于2018年9月25日周二 下午3:01写道：
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think questions about Flink should be posted on the
> >> >> public
> >> >>>>>> mailing
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> lists
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of asking just a single expert.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> There's many reasons for that:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * usually more than one person can answer the question
> >> >> (what
> >> >>>> if
> >> >>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> expert
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is not available?)
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * non-committers can join the discussion and contribute to
> >> >>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>> community
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (how can they become experts otherwise?)
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * the knowledge is shared on the mailing list (helps in
> >> >>> cases
> >> >>>>> when
> >> >>>>>>>>> only
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> one
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> person can answer the question)
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Last but not least, my concern is that committers for
> >> >>> popular
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> contribution
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> areas would be flooded with requests.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Even without being listed as a "component expert", I
> >> >> cannot
> >> >>>>> handle
> >> >>>>>>>>> all
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> review requests directed at me.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I work on issues (PR reviews, my contributions,
> >> >> discussions)
> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>>>>> I
> >> >>>>>>>>>> deem
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> important and being constantly pinged does not really help
> >> >>> to
> >> >>>>>> speed
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> things
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> up.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> There are of course cases when it is important to be
> >> >>> notified,
> >> >>>>> but
> >> >>>>>>>>> IMO
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> chances that those get the right attention decrease with
> >> >> the
> >> >>>>>> number
> >> >>>>>>>>> of
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> requests.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, Fabian
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Di., 25. Sep. 2018 um 04:10 Uhr schrieb Tzu-Li Chen <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for start the discussion Stephan!
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (1) Do we agree on the five basic steps below?*
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to the five steps and making the third question in the
> >> >>>>>> proposal
> >> >>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> first.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (2) How do we understand that consensus is reached about
> >> >>>> adding
> >> >>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to lazy consensus with one committer's +1
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (3) To answer the question whether a PR needs special
> >> >>>> attention
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contributor can ask for special attention, which is
> >> >> treated
> >> >>>> as
> >> >>>>> a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggestion.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Committer can ask for another committers' attention,
> >> >> either
> >> >>>> for
> >> >>>>>>>>> advice
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> or
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> transfer
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right of decision.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO it is quite help to add a page about "component
> >> >>> experts",
> >> >>>>>>> attach
> >> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> link  it
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> from README. This would be a really helpful information
> >> >> to
> >> >>>> new
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so that they know to whom he can cc or ask for advice.
> >> >>>> Besides
> >> >>>>> it
> >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be helpful for those who want to know more about the
> >> >>>> mechanism
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> underneath
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Flink, now they know with whom they can consult.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tison.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>