Let’s keep this simple. If you’re nominating yourself, just commit to the
branch directly. If you wish to nominate someone else, make a PR and tag them
as a reviewer.
Robert, do you want to give this part of the process a week or so, and on Dec
14 take what we’ve got on the branch and create a formal PR to bring it to
develop? We can always fill in any missing code-owners after Dec 14 via PR
against develop.
From: Robert Houghton <rhough...@vmware.com>
Date: Monday, December 7, 2020 at 1:38 PM
To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
To be honest, I hadn’t thought of the mess that might make. I guess, we can
either make changes directly to the feature branch, which will eventually have
a pull-request back to [develop], or we can modify Owen’s existing PR. At the
end of the day, it all has to go through the normal PR process back to the
develop branch.
-Robert
From: Jens Deppe <jde...@vmware.com>
Date: Monday, December 7, 2020 at 11:43 AM
To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
Should we just be adding to Owen's PR?
If everyone creates their own PR we'll probably end up with a bunch of merge
conflicts.
--Jens
On 12/7/20, 10:07 AM, "Robert Houghton" <rhough...@vmware.com> wrote:
I haven’t seen any negative responses, and a big THANK YOU to @onichols for
making the first PR to self-volunteer into ownership of some code. Lets give
people another week to nominate, or self-nominate, as PRs against
[feature/introduce-codeowners], and plan to merge this feature into develop on
14 December?
From: Owen Nichols <onich...@vmware.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 8:56 PM
To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
It looks like the discussion period ended Nov 25 with all comments in
support, so next phase is populating the proposed codeowners file. @Robert how
long do we have to populate this before you plan to formally propose activating
it on develop?
As prescribed I’ve submitted a PR[1] against the
feature/introduce-codeowners branch to nominate myself as a code owner for
areas I feel qualified to own.
[1]
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fgeode%2Fpull%2F5802&data=04%7C01%7Conichols%40vmware.com%7Cbd96934ce32445daca1908d89af86939%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637429739001095616%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=FpEmIZEtZmQB3NgYed2tak7Vk6cV7gukYrXYk9QSRuE%3D&reserved=0
From: Xiaojian Zhou <zho...@vmware.com>
Date: Friday, November 20, 2020 at 11:06 AM
To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
+1
I saw the template of splitting the geode code. Can someone nominate a few
codeowners in the file as examples?
On 11/20/20, 7:32 AM, "Alexander Murmann" <amurm...@vmware.com> wrote:
+1
I agree with Owen's point that this will improve the experience for new
contributors. It also helps people new to the community to have confidence that
they got the type of review they need to feel confident to merge. I might get
to reviews that are both from great committers who can review for things like
coding style, test coverage etc. However, I might be unaware that neither of
them know the area I am modifying particularly well. This solves this problem.
I can merge with more confidence, once I got the review from the owner.
________________________________
From: Anthony Baker <bak...@vmware.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 17:55
To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
+1
I think we as a project will need to iterator on the code owners as
well as the process for code owners. But this is a model that has been adopted
by a number of OSS projects both within and outside of Apache. I like that it
provides visibility to PR authors and associates motivated experts to review
and merge changes.
Anthony
> On Nov 19, 2020, at 10:46 AM, Ernie Burghardt <burghar...@vmware.com>
wrote:
>
> Perfect, then let's give this a try.
> +1
>
> On 11/19/20, 10:45 AM, "Robert Houghton" <rhough...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ernie,
>
> DRAFT PRs do not get reviewers by default, but when the draft
transitions to ‘ready’, then the owners are requested to review.
>
>
> From: Ernie Burghardt <burghar...@vmware.com>
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 9:56 AM
> To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
> Does GitHub allow us to limit this automated action to non-DRAFT
PRs?
>
> On 11/18/20, 8:28 PM, "Owen Nichols" <onich...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
> +1 This will greatly improve the experience for contributors.
Instead of an intimidating empty list of reviewers when you submit a PR (and no
ability to add reviewers, if you’re not a committer), it will be great to
already have at least two reviewers automagically assigned.
>
> I have a small concern that initially populating this file via
a flurry of PRs may result in a lot of merge conflicts with anyone else that
volunteers on the same or an adjacent line. Also, since you _must_ be a
committer to be a code owner, is a PR even necessary…would directly committing
changes to the feature/introduce-codeowners branch be acceptable? If not, who
needs to review and who can merge the PRs against the ‘introduce’ branch?
>
> What happens if you are the only owner for an area, can you
approve your own PR? Even if the goal is two owners per area, does that mean
PRs by either owner cannot be merged if the only other owner is on vacation or
otherwise unavailable?
>
> Can we submit PRs against the ‘introduce’ branch now and they
just won’t be merged before Nov 26, or do we all just need to be patient until
this review period has concluded?
>
> From: Robert Houghton <rhough...@apache.org>
> Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 2:07 PM
> To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
> Hello Devs.
>
> I would like to improve the quality of the pull-request
reviews we see for
> critical parts of the Apache Geode project. In discussions
with other
> committers, a (not the) big hurdle to that is getting the
right eyes to
> look at a given PR. To that end, I propose the adoption of
GitHub's
> CODEOWNERS functionality for the Apache Geode code repository.
>
> A discussion-document of this issue has been written up
> by @upthewaterspout. Thanks Dan!
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FGEODE%2FIntroduce%2BCodeowners%2Bfile&data=04%7C01%7Conichols%40vmware.com%7Cbd96934ce32445daca1908d89af86939%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637429739001095616%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=ZojotG38moHHzZ%2FTCAqs5inNCFYUrSQmDFTNWmh0Sls%3D&reserved=0
>
> I have tested the feature with fellow Geode committers
@upthewaterspout
> and @onichols-pivotal, and found it to meet our expectations.
Please
> review the document, and comment or reply to this thread, by
25 November,
> so we might start the task of nominating and applying for
ownership.
>
> -Robert Houghton
>
