airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kamil BreguĊ‚a <kamil.breg...@polidea.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Moving stuff from CWiki to Github ?
Date Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:35:19 GMT
1.  I do not see a problem. Issues may have a prefix in the title, which
will allow us to easily find them.

Release - Airflow 2.0
Release - Airflow 1.10
AIP-32 - API
AIP-XXX - Docker Image/Helm Chart
AIP-XXX - XXXX

However, I do not mind using labels in this case.
https://github.com/apache/airflow/labels/AIP-31

2.  I think we can use the pinned issues. This will allow you to find them
easily because they will be closer to the tickets.
https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/pinning-an-issue-to-your-repository

This feature has a significant limitation as we can only pin 3 issues, but
I think we can benefit from it as it will be easy to stay organized. To
overcome this limitation, one of the items may be indexed with the
currently running projects.  For now, I've pinned an issue with Airflow 2.0
release info so we can see what it looks like. When we like it, we can
create an index and pin it. I think it will be much newer friendly than
WIKI. WDYT?

Best regards,
Kamil







.

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:49 AM Jarek Potiuk <Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
wrote:

> I think it describes very well what we discussed so far. I have two points
> to add:
>
> 1) Using Milestone:
>
> I prefer to keep milestones to only mark stuff for global releases of
> Airflow and nothing else. If we use Milestones for SIG groups this will
> become unmanageable (and I know Milestones are used by the release
> management scripts to verify if everything marked for release is already
> merged).
>
> 2) CWiki vs. Github Wiki and Index of "Currently running Airflow
> initiatives"
>
> Another thing that I wanted to add is whether we use both wikis (or one
> only) after cleanup I proposed.
> I think CWiki is better for design docs/discussions etc. - it has diagram
> support built-in and a few other features that make it easier to have
> better "design" discussion. Github Wiki is very poor.
> I agree that Github issues are great for most of the stuff. But I think we
> could use Github Wiki to keep index with links to the issues + one sentence
> of explanation for those more "permanent" and long-running "meta"
> issues.I'd call it "Currently running Airflow initiatives":
>
> What I can see there currently is:
>
> * Airflow 2.0 Progress
> * Backport Release 2nd wave
> * Quarantine Issues (master, v1-10-test, v1-10-stable)
> * Refactors and cleanups
>     * Pylint
>     * MyPy
>     * ...
> * SIG Groups
>    * link to meta-issue for each SIG Group
>
> This would be a great point for newcomers to have a look of what's going on
> currently in Airflow without having to look at 500 issues. It might be
> obvious for more seasoned committers that those initiatives are in progress
> but you would not know that before you go into details of individual "meta"
> issues (and you'd have to know that there are those meta issues in the
> first place). i think it's much more discoverable if we just have one page
> in Github Wiki with those.
>
> WDYT?
>
> J.
>

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