Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Kafka >> mail # dev >> Maintainer system?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Maintainer system?
Okay so there seems to be a consensus that this is a good idea. I have
added a wiki page with maintainers:
  https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Maintainers
Could committers do the following:
1. Add themselves to areas they would like to act as a maintainer for? Our
goal will be two have two maintainers for each area, but if we have either
one or three that is fine too. Sign up for areas where you think you have
expertise or can make a difference.
2. Add other areas I left out. I think it is fine if they are small. For
example I think it would be fine to have a single maintainer for
Utils.scala even though that is not a major area.

-Jay
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Jay Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Jun is just far and away the best reviewer. So maybe we should just
> require that everybody get Jun to review their patches. :-)
>
> Or, more practically, maybe Jun should put together some guidelines on
> what he does and we can try to emulate.
>
> -Jay
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Prashanth Menon <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> +1 from me on the maintainer system and having a primary/secondary for
>> components.
>>
>> I also think we should try as much as possible to get at least two
>> reviewers for patches that come in.  This is something I'm very guilty of
>> and am trying to correct.  I get the feeling Jun is overwhelmed with patch
>> reviews :)
>>
>> - Prashanth
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Neha Narkhede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > +1 on this, I like the idea of having a primary/secondary owner system
>> > for each component.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Neha
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Jun Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > I think that's a good idea. It will be good to have at least 2
>> > maintainers
>> > > per component.
>> > >
>> > > I'd encourage more people to review patches. The more patches one
>> > reviews,
>> > > the more familiar he/she is with the components.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Jun
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Jay Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hey guys,
>> > >>
>> > >> The number of developers and code base size for Kafka is getting
>> larger.
>> > >>
>> > >> One way to help scale things gracefully would be to have an official
>> > idea
>> > >> of "subsystems" and have official maintainers for those. The duties
>> of a
>> > >> maintainer would be
>> > >> 1. Be the final word on API design in that area
>> > >> 2. Ensure sufficient documentation and test coverage for that
>> subsystem
>> > >> 3. Review all code changes in that sub-system area
>> > >> 4. Ensure that patches in that area get applied in a timely fashion
>> > >>
>> > >> In particular I think we could do a better job of getting patches in
>> in
>> > a
>> > >> timely manner.
>> > >>
>> > >> Here are what I see as logically distinct systems or areas:
>> > >>
>> > >>    - Producer (java and scala)
>> > >>    - Consumer (java and scala)
>> > >>    - Network layer (kafka.network.*)
>> > >>    - Log (kafka.log.*)
>> > >>    - Replication (controller, fetcher threads, hw mark stuff, etc)
>> > >>    - Kafka API impl (basically just KafkaApi.scala)
>> > >>    - Hadoop stuff
>> > >>    - Perf tools and system tests
>> > >>    - Misc other small things: metrics, utils, etc.
>> > >>
>> > >> Obviously many features will cut across these layers, but the idea is
>> > that
>> > >> by having a real owner that is responsible for that area we will get
>> > higher
>> > >> quality.
>> > >>
>> > >> I think we are doing this informally already, but making it formal
>> would
>> > >> help ensure you knew the right people to get input from. I think it
>> > >> probably wouldn't make sense to start doing this until post-0.8
>> since we
>> > >> are in the middle of so many things right now, but I wanted to see
>> what
>> > >> people thought...?
>> > >>
>> > >> -Jay
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>
>