ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Collaboration process at Ignite
Date Mon, 10 Aug 2015 20:53:30 GMT
Thanks for the comments, Raul. I generally agree with all the points you
have made. Additional comments are inline.

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Raul Kripalani <raulk@apache.org> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I started contributing to Ignite a few weeks ago and I would like to raise
> a few topics for discussion.
>
> 1) This project desperately needs an IRC channel. At this stage of the
> project lifecycle open, ephemeral chit-chat is important. Ignite is trying
> to get as many people involved in the project as possible and to build
> relationships. Email is too heavy a tool for that.
>

I agree. I think the email has its obvious shortcomings and having a chat
channel will definitely make it easier for everyone to communicate.

Let's decide on Slack vs. IRC. Any preferences?


> Contributors working on code who would like to shoot across a quick
> question/doubt to the core team cannot do that right now. Forums are not
> a place to ask questions like: "hey, is it ok to add a notNullOrEmpty method
> to the GridArgumentCheck class?".
>
> This is even more relevant given the proportionally large amount of
> committers associated to a single company at the moment.
>
> 2) At this point the community cannot be very picky with code style in
> contributions. I don't want to generalise, but a spirit of gratitude vs.
> one of stern demands would be appropriate. See for example this personal
> contribution of mine [1]. No "thanks" to be found anywhere, just a "go read
> the docs" and "by the way, we don't use this framework".
>
>
Absolutely agree. I don't think this is a general trend within the
community, but we should all be more courteous with our communication,
especially when it comes to the new contributions.



> This is not the ASF way – let alone for a project transitioning to a TLP.
>
> 3) The "Development Process" wiki page must be linked to from a notice
> box in the Contribute page [2]. I haven't found a link, and if there is one,
> it's not catching my attention.
>

Will add the links.


> 4) You should not expect people to contribute code that adheres to your
> specification unless you attach a check into the build. In the Camel
> project we have a Maven profile -Pvalidate that runs a checkstyle
> expressing our coding style. Contributors run this profile before
> submitting a patch to us.
>

I think we should look into adding something similar to Ignite.


> It doesn't make sense to ask a contributor to write code in a style they
> don't like, just because someone else prefers it that way. Developers like
> to write code in their own style, and then use a tool to adapt it to the
> community standards.
>
> That said, I think there is an IntelliJ formatting template somewhere in
> the source repo, but remember that not everybody uses IntelliJ. And there
> may be a checkstyle file somewhere too, but it is not attached to the
> build. Therefore, in practical terms, the community is not enforcing a
> style other than by a Wiki page buried somewhere in the community – not
> enough.
>

We should be enforcing it with the build, but I also like having the
IntelliJ formatting in the project as well. We should add something similar
for Eclipse (I don't think there is one yet).


> 5) Merging pull requests from Github is not evil. There is no reason why to
> impose the submission of a patch attached to a JIRA in my opinion. If you
> are worried about regulatory/legal/IP aspects, I think the ASL license
> headers at the top and the explicit action that the contributor takes to
> send in the pull request is enough to grant authorisation. That's the way
> we do it in Camel.
>

The main issue here is public TC builds. Whenever you attach a patch to the
ticket, TC build gets automatically triggered. To my knowledge, there is
work being done on having the same with pull requests:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1217


> People like working with Github, and it's more convenient for everybody. In
> Camel we even have a Github - JIRA integration whereby a bot comments
> in the relevant ticket when a PR is submitted.
>
> Let's be embracing, not enforcing. At least at this stage.
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-ignite/pull/11#issuecomment-129505860.
> [2] https://ignite.incubator.apache.org/community/contribute.html
>
> Regards,
>
> *Raúl Kripalani*
> Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source
> Integration specialist
> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
>

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