Abandoned Patch Available JIRA tickets

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Igniters,

We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive for more
than a month:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d

(JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d)


Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any answer.
You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()

(JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d AND
comment  ~ currentUser())


I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you can help
with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.

Thanks,
Pavel

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Bumping the thread.

Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive for more
> than a month:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
>
> (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d)
>
>
> Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any answer.
> You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
>
> (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d AND
> comment  ~ currentUser())
>
>
> I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you can help
> with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
>
> Thanks,
> Pavel
>

[Dmitriy Pavlov]

Hi Denis,

There is an interesting aspect of this issue for me.

How close is Ignite community in this metric (not reviewed/not merged
tickets) to other Apache communities? For example, to Cassandra.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov


пн, 5 февр. 2018 г. в 14:51, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:

> Bumping the thread.
>
> Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?
>
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive for more
> > than a month:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
> >
> > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d)
> >
> >
> > Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any answer.
> > You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
> >
> > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d AND
> > comment  ~ currentUser())
> >
> >
> > I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you can
> help
> > with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Pavel
> >
>

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Fixed links:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Denis,
>
> There is an interesting aspect of this issue for me.
>
> How close is Ignite community in this metric (not reviewed/not merged
> tickets) to other Apache communities? For example, to Cassandra.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
>
> пн, 5 февр. 2018 г. в 14:51, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Bumping the thread.
> >
> > Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive for
> more
> > > than a month:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
> > >
> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d)
> > >
> > >
> > > Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any
> answer.
> > > You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
> > >
> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d
> AND
> > > comment  ~ currentUser())
> > >
> > >
> > > I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you can
> > help
> > > with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Pavel
> > >
> >
>

[Dmitrii Ryabov]

Dmitry, there are 103 tickets for Cassandra [1] and 120 for Zookeeper [2].

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14132?jql=project%3Dcassandra%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"%20AND%20updated%20<%20-30d
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dzookeeper%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"%20AND%20updated%20<%20-30d

2018-02-05 15:08 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:

> Fixed links:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Denis,
>>
>> There is an interesting aspect of this issue for me.
>>
>> How close is Ignite community in this metric (not reviewed/not merged
>> tickets) to other Apache communities? For example, to Cassandra.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Dmitriy Pavlov
>>
>>
>> пн, 5 февр. 2018 г. в 14:51, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> > Bumping the thread.
>> >
>> > Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Igniters,
>> > >
>> > > We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive for
>> more
>> > > than a month:
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
>> > >
>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any
>> answer.
>> > > You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
>> > >
>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d
>> AND
>> > > comment  ~ currentUser())
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you can
>> > help
>> > > with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Pavel
>> > >
>> >
>>

[daradurvs]

Hi Pavel,

I've noticed that usually abandoned tickets are tickets without
specified "Fix Version", otherwise tickets should be viewed once at
least by release manager for moving to next release.

Should we do "Fix Version" as required field?


On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dmitry, there are 103 tickets for Cassandra [1] and 120 for Zookeeper [2].
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14132?jql=project%3Dcassandra%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"%20AND%20updated%20<%20-30d
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dzookeeper%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"%20AND%20updated%20<%20-30d
>
> 2018-02-05 15:08 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
>> Fixed links:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Denis,
>>>
>>> There is an interesting aspect of this issue for me.
>>>
>>> How close is Ignite community in this metric (not reviewed/not merged
>>> tickets) to other Apache communities? For example, to Cassandra.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Dmitriy Pavlov
>>>
>>>
>>> пн, 5 февр. 2018 г. в 14:51, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>> > Bumping the thread.
>>> >
>>> > Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Igniters,
>>> > >
>>> > > We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive for
>>> more
>>> > > than a month:
>>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
>>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
>>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
>>> > >
>>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d)
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any
>>> answer.
>>> > > You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
>>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
>>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
>>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
>>> > >
>>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated < -30d
>>> AND
>>> > > comment  ~ currentUser())
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you can
>>> > help
>>> > > with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > > Pavel
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>

--
Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Fix Version should not be a required field, uncheduled tickets are
perfectly normal.

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Pavel,
>
> I've noticed that usually abandoned tickets are tickets without
> specified "Fix Version", otherwise tickets should be viewed once at
> least by release manager for moving to next release.
>
> Should we do "Fix Version" as required field?
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > Dmitry, there are 103 tickets for Cassandra [1] and 120 for Zookeeper
> [2].
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14132?
> jql=project%3Dcassandra%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"
> %20AND%20updated%20<%20-30d
> > [2] <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
> 3Dzookeeper%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"%20AND%
> 20updated%20<%20-30d
> >
> > 2018-02-05 15:08 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> >> Fixed links:
> >>
> >> <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
> 3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
> >>
> >> <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
> 3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Denis,
> >>>
> >>> There is an interesting aspect of this issue for me.
> >>>
> >>> How close is Ignite community in this metric (not reviewed/not merged
> >>> tickets) to other Apache communities? For example, to Cassandra.
> >>>
> >>> Sincerely,
> >>> Dmitriy Pavlov
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> пн, 5 февр. 2018 г. в 14:51, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> >>>
> >>> > Bumping the thread.
> >>> >
> >>> > Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?
> >>> >
> >>> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> [hidden email]>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > Igniters,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive
> for
> >>> more
> >>> > > than a month:
> >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> >>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%
> 20Available%22%20AND%
> >>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
> >>> > >
> >>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated <
> -30d)
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any
> >>> answer.
> >>> > > You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
> >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> >>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%
> 20Available%22%20AND%
> >>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
> >>> > >
> >>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated <
> -30d
> >>> AND
> >>> > > comment  ~ currentUser())
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you
> can
> >>> > help
> >>> > > with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Thanks,
> >>> > > Pavel
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>

[Anton Vinogradov]

 Guys,

It looks like main problem is "no one from commiters interested in
featureXXX", so, featureXXX at status PA last XXX years.
Sounds like a bad joke, but true.

There 2 types of Issues in PA:

1) Created by commiter.
And I see only ~20% of such issues at list mentioned above.
So, that type of issues have less problems with merge and review.

2) Created and implemented by contributor.
~80% of PA issues.
I see no presentations and discussions for the most of such issues, and
that's the reason of interest lack.

It looks like the only one way to solve this problem is to agree that
"contributor always should present idea & solution and motivate community
to review and merge solution".

Thoughts?

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:34 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Fix Version should not be a required field, uncheduled tickets are
> perfectly normal.
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Pavel,
> >
> > I've noticed that usually abandoned tickets are tickets without
> > specified "Fix Version", otherwise tickets should be viewed once at
> > least by release manager for moving to next release.
> >
> > Should we do "Fix Version" as required field?
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > Dmitry, there are 103 tickets for Cassandra [1] and 120 for Zookeeper
> > [2].
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14132?
> > jql=project%3Dcassandra%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"
> > %20AND%20updated%20<%20-30d
> > > [2] <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
> > 3Dzookeeper%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"%20AND%
> > 20updated%20<%20-30d
> > >
> > > 2018-02-05 15:08 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> > >> Fixed links:
> > >>
> > >> <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
> > 3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
> > >>
> > >> <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
> > 3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
> > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi Denis,
> > >>>
> > >>> There is an interesting aspect of this issue for me.
> > >>>
> > >>> How close is Ignite community in this metric (not reviewed/not merged
> > >>> tickets) to other Apache communities? For example, to Cassandra.
> > >>>
> > >>> Sincerely,
> > >>> Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> пн, 5 февр. 2018 г. в 14:51, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
> > >>>
> > >>> > Bumping the thread.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > [hidden email]>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > Igniters,
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive
> > for
> > >>> more
> > >>> > > than a month:
> > >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> > >>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%
> > 20Available%22%20AND%
> > >>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated <
> > -30d)
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any
> > >>> answer.
> > >>> > > You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
> > >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
> > >>> > > jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%
> > 20Available%22%20AND%
> > >>> > > 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated <
> > -30d
> > >>> AND
> > >>> > > comment  ~ currentUser())
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you
> > can
> > >>> > help
> > >>> > > with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Thanks,
> > >>> > > Pavel
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
> >
>

[dmagda]

I guess it’s all about discipline.

Committers need to walk-through a list of the pull-request regularly while contributors have to remind of a pending pull-request periodically. So both parts have to be proactive.

Another approach is to find a volunteer from the community who will keep an eye on the contributions and spread them out among committers.

Not sure I like the latter approach and would rather go for the one when both the committers and contributors are proactive and disciplined. But guess what, if you want to make the contributors proactive then the committers have to be an example.

—
Denis  

> On Feb 5, 2018, at 5:46 AM, Anton Vinogradov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> It looks like main problem is "no one from commiters interested in
> featureXXX", so, featureXXX at status PA last XXX years.
> Sounds like a bad joke, but true.
>
> There 2 types of Issues in PA:
>
> 1) Created by commiter.
> And I see only ~20% of such issues at list mentioned above.
> So, that type of issues have less problems with merge and review.
>
> 2) Created and implemented by contributor.
> ~80% of PA issues.
> I see no presentations and discussions for the most of such issues, and
> that's the reason of interest lack.
>
> It looks like the only one way to solve this problem is to agree that
> "contributor always should present idea & solution and motivate community
> to review and merge solution".
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:34 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Fix Version should not be a required field, uncheduled tickets are
>> perfectly normal.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pavel,
>>>
>>> I've noticed that usually abandoned tickets are tickets without
>>> specified "Fix Version", otherwise tickets should be viewed once at
>>> least by release manager for moving to next release.
>>>
>>> Should we do "Fix Version" as required field?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Dmitry, there are 103 tickets for Cassandra [1] and 120 for Zookeeper
>>> [2].
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14132?
>>> jql=project%3Dcassandra%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"
>>> %20AND%20updated%20<%20-30d
>>>> [2] <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
>>> 3Dzookeeper%20AND%20status%3D"Patch%20Available"%20AND%
>>> 20updated%20<%20-30d
>>>>
>>>> 2018-02-05 15:08 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
>>>>> Fixed links:
>>>>>
>>>>> <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
>>> 3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
>>> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
>>>>>
>>>>> <a href="https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%">https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%
>>> 3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%
>>> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Denis,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is an interesting aspect of this issue for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How close is Ignite community in this metric (not reviewed/not merged
>>>>>> tickets) to other Apache communities? For example, to Cassandra.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> пн, 5 февр. 2018 г. в 14:51, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bumping the thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Denis Magda, as a PMC chair, can you please look into this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Igniters,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We have *almost 60* of PATCH AVAILABLE tickets that are inactive
>>> for
>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>> than a month:
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
>>>>>>>> jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%
>>> 20Available%22%20AND%
>>>>>>>> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated <
>>> -30d)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some of these tickets ask specific people for review without any
>>>>>> answer.
>>>>>>>> You can check if you have any pending reviews with this link:
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333285&
>>>>>>>> jql=project%3Dignite%20AND%20status%3D%22Patch%
>>> 20Available%22%20AND%
>>>>>>>> 20updated%20%3C%20-30d%20AND%20comment%20%20~%20currentUser()
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (JQL: project=ignite AND status="Patch Available" AND updated <
>>> -30d
>>>>>> AND
>>>>>>>> comment  ~ currentUser())
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I encourage everyone to walk through these tickets and see if you
>>> can
>>>>>>> help
>>>>>>>> with reviewing and merging some of these contributions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Pavel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>>>
>>

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Periodic punches can frustrate committers, and also it's unpleasant for
contributors. Most IP->PA transitions are commented with something like
"John Doe, this awesome feature is ready and needs your review." Maybe it's
better to adopt following rule of thumb? If the change is clean and
straightforward it should be reviewed is a day, otherwise committer puts a
comment in Jira issue about planned review time.

Is this acceptable?

2018-02-07 0:14 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <[hidden email]>:

> I guess it’s all about discipline.
>
> Committers need to walk-through a list of the pull-request regularly while
> contributors have to remind of a pending pull-request periodically. So both
> parts have to be proactive.
>
> Another approach is to find a volunteer from the community who will keep
> an eye on the contributions and spread them out among committers.
>
> Not sure I like the latter approach and would rather go for the one when
> both the committers and contributors are proactive and disciplined. But
> guess what, if you want to make the contributors proactive then the
> committers have to be an example.
>
> —
> Denis
>
>
>

--
Best regards,
  Andrey Kuznetsov.

[dmagda]

Anyway, your suggestion requires to have self-disciplined committers that will be keeping track of the tickets they promised to review.

I’m ready to propose a guideline here but the committers have to be committed to that. Otherwise, I’ll just waste my time.

—
Denis

> On Feb 7, 2018, at 1:41 AM, Andrey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Periodic punches can frustrate committers, and also it's unpleasant for
> contributors. Most IP->PA transitions are commented with something like
> "John Doe, this awesome feature is ready and needs your review." Maybe it's
> better to adopt following rule of thumb? If the change is clean and
> straightforward it should be reviewed is a day, otherwise committer puts a
> comment in Jira issue about planned review time.
>
> Is this acceptable?
>
> 2018-02-07 0:14 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>
>> I guess it’s all about discipline.
>>
>> Committers need to walk-through a list of the pull-request regularly while
>> contributors have to remind of a pending pull-request periodically. So both
>> parts have to be proactive.
>>
>> Another approach is to find a volunteer from the community who will keep
>> an eye on the contributions and spread them out among committers.
>>
>> Not sure I like the latter approach and would rather go for the one when
>> both the committers and contributors are proactive and disciplined. But
>> guess what, if you want to make the contributors proactive then the
>> committers have to be an example.
>>
>> —
>> Denis
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Andrey Kuznetsov.

[Dmitriy Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

I want to raise up this thread again. If your ticket seems to be stuck in
review process, please write. I will try to help.

Can't promise it would be fast, but I hope together we can find a solution
for each particular case.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 8 февр. 2018 г. в 2:08, Denis Magda <[hidden email]>:

> Anyway, your suggestion requires to have self-disciplined committers that
> will be keeping track of the tickets they promised to review.
>
> I’m ready to propose a guideline here but the committers have to be
> committed to that. Otherwise, I’ll just waste my time.
>
> —
> Denis
>
> > On Feb 7, 2018, at 1:41 AM, Andrey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Periodic punches can frustrate committers, and also it's unpleasant for
> > contributors. Most IP->PA transitions are commented with something like
> > "John Doe, this awesome feature is ready and needs your review." Maybe
> it's
> > better to adopt following rule of thumb? If the change is clean and
> > straightforward it should be reviewed is a day, otherwise committer puts
> a
> > comment in Jira issue about planned review time.
> >
> > Is this acceptable?
> >
> > 2018-02-07 0:14 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:
> [hidden email]>>:
> >
> >> I guess it’s all about discipline.
> >>
> >> Committers need to walk-through a list of the pull-request regularly
> while
> >> contributors have to remind of a pending pull-request periodically. So
> both
> >> parts have to be proactive.
> >>
> >> Another approach is to find a volunteer from the community who will keep
> >> an eye on the contributions and spread them out among committers.
> >>
> >> Not sure I like the latter approach and would rather go for the one when
> >> both the committers and contributors are proactive and disciplined. But
> >> guess what, if you want to make the contributors proactive then the
> >> committers have to be an example.
> >>
> >> —
> >> Denis
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >  Andrey Kuznetsov.
>
>

[Dmitriy Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

By common efforts from maintainers, committers and experienced
contributors, it was possible to reduce the number of PA tasks
 - waiting for review to 88,
 - with no activity for 1 month and waiting for review to 24.

'No activity' tasks are more than a quarter from all patches waiting, so I
ask everyone involved make one more step towards completion of review,
especially for probably outdated issues.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

See also
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Issues+waiting+for+review


пт, 16 мар. 2018 г. в 16:15, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>:

> Hi Igniters,
>
> I want to raise up this thread again. If your ticket seems to be stuck in
> review process, please write. I will try to help.
>
> Can't promise it would be fast, but I hope together we can find a solution
> for each particular case.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> чт, 8 февр. 2018 г. в 2:08, Denis Magda <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Anyway, your suggestion requires to have self-disciplined committers that
>> will be keeping track of the tickets they promised to review.
>>
>> I’m ready to propose a guideline here but the committers have to be
>> committed to that. Otherwise, I’ll just waste my time.
>>
>> —
>> Denis
>>
>> > On Feb 7, 2018, at 1:41 AM, Andrey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Periodic punches can frustrate committers, and also it's unpleasant for
>> > contributors. Most IP->PA transitions are commented with something like
>> > "John Doe, this awesome feature is ready and needs your review." Maybe
>> it's
>> > better to adopt following rule of thumb? If the change is clean and
>> > straightforward it should be reviewed is a day, otherwise committer
>> puts a
>> > comment in Jira issue about planned review time.
>> >
>> > Is this acceptable?
>> >
>> > 2018-02-07 0:14 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <[hidden email] <mailto:
>> [hidden email]>>:
>> >
>> >> I guess it’s all about discipline.
>> >>
>> >> Committers need to walk-through a list of the pull-request regularly
>> while
>> >> contributors have to remind of a pending pull-request periodically. So
>> both
>> >> parts have to be proactive.
>> >>
>> >> Another approach is to find a volunteer from the community who will
>> keep
>> >> an eye on the contributions and spread them out among committers.
>> >>
>> >> Not sure I like the latter approach and would rather go for the one
>> when
>> >> both the committers and contributors are proactive and disciplined. But
>> >> guess what, if you want to make the contributors proactive then the
>> >> committers have to be an example.
>> >>
>> >> —
>> >> Denis
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> >  Andrey Kuznetsov.
>>
>>