Date   

FYI: Presto TSC GitHub Repo is Created

Chris Aniszczyk
 

Here's the repo with meeting agendas:

We held our first unofficial "bootstrap" meeting this week:

The next meeting is on Nov 19th, please add your name and any agenda items you would like to add here:

Here is the foundation repo with the more boring legal paperwork:

Thanks!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


Nominating Shixuan and Jiexi as new committers

jamessun@...
 

Dear committers,
Rongrong, Wenlei, and I had a discussion on having more committers. We are thinking nominating Shixuan and Jiexi. Shixuan and Jiexi have been working on Presto for more than 2 years. They have shown solid coding and reviewing capability. My personal experience is we don't need many review iterations to have these two folks in the right shape. Let us know if there is any objection.

From the Slack channel, Rebecca also supports Shixuan as a committer.

Here are some stats for these two:
git log --author="Shixuan Fan" --oneline
Area: grouped execution
90 commits  9,314 ++  2,683 --

git log --author="Jiexi Lin" --oneline
Area: Raptor
62 commits  8,175 ++  2,160 --


Thanks!

James


TSC meeting invitation

Brian Warner <bwarner@...>
 

Presto TSC,

My name is Brian Warner, I'm from the Linux Foundation and am helping to get various things bootstrapped for the TSC and the Governing Board.

You should have just received an invitation to the upcoming TSC meeting.  If you haven't, please let me know.

I've also been pushing a number of PRs against the TSC repo, which I'd encourage you to check out and review.

Finally, I created and added the project committers to a separate list called "presto-tsc-voting", which is a private list for the voting members of the TSC (per the technical charter).  While we expect that the consensus process will be used for most decisions, this gives the TSC a channel for taking formal votes.

If you have any questions between now and the TSC meeting, please reach out.

Best,
Brian

--

Brian Warner
The Linux Foundation
+1 724 301-6171


Re: Nominating Shixuan and Jiexi as new committers

rongrong100@...
 

I support adding them as committers. Should we have a deadline for voting?


Re: Nominating Shixuan and Jiexi as new committers

jamessun@...
 

Thanks for supporting. Shall we set this Friday (11/15/2019) as the deadline?


Re: Nominating Shixuan and Jiexi as new committers

Wenlei Xie
 

Support +1
--


Re: Nominating Shixuan and Jiexi as new committers

Andrii Rosa
 

+1

On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 11:50 PM <wenlei.xie@...> wrote:
Support +1
--


Re: Nominating Shixuan and Jiexi as new committers

zluo@...
 

+1

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 8:09 AM Andrii Rosa <andriyrosa@...> wrote:
+1

On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 11:50 PM <wenlei.xie@...> wrote:
Support +1
--


Nominating Leiqing as new committer

rongrong100@...
 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong


Re: Nominating Leiqing as new committer

jamessun@...
 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong


Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

Maria Basmanova
 

My impression was that it was a requirement that committers demonstrate solid skill in providing high quality code reviews. Do you have evidence of that for Leiqing or is this not a requirement?

 

-Masha

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "jamessun@..." <jamessun@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:05 PM
To: "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong


Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

rongrong100@...
 

Of course committers should be able to provide high quality code reviews. Personally I found Leiqing's review on my PRs related to SQL function very valuable, even though he was not as familiar with the topic yet. Here are some example PRs:
https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/12743
https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/13384

Here's his recent review on verifier related PR, which is more in his domain of expertise:
https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/13661

Does this resolve your concerns?

Thanks!
Rongrong


On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:08 PM Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...> wrote:

My impression was that it was a requirement that committers demonstrate solid skill in providing high quality code reviews. Do you have evidence of that for Leiqing or is this not a requirement?

 

-Masha

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "jamessun@..." <jamessun@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:05 PM
To: "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong


Re: Nominating Leiqing as new committer

Shixuan Fan
 

+1
Leiqing has shown expertise in verifier revamp and given his current work on SQL function, I think he should be eligible.
To James's point, if we cannot agree on the committer nomination, we should at least make him an incubating committer (do we have a formal process on this?).
It feels kind of awkward to vote on the first work day after becoming a committer =/


Re: Nominating Leiqing as new committer

Wenlei Xie
 

Agreed with Shixuan. 

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 13:32 <shixuan@...> wrote:
+1
Leiqing has shown expertise in verifier revamp and given his current work on SQL function, I think he should be eligible.
To James's point, if we cannot agree on the committer nomination, we should at least make him an incubating committer (do we have a formal process on this?).
It feels kind of awkward to vote on the first work day after becoming a committer =/

--


Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

Maria Basmanova
 

I expect committers to have substantial expertise on a subset of core parts of the engine. The verifier scope is quite limited and having committer with expertise in just that area is of limited value. Furthermore, I expect to-be-committers to have a track record of providing quality reviews and approving PRs such that existing committers don’t need to review the code and can trust the to-be-committers approval. In other words, I’d expect to see existing committers delegating code reviews to to-be-committers on a regular basis. I don’t see evidence of that.

 

-Masha

 

From: Rongrong <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:27 PM
To: Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...>
Cc: James Sun <jamessun@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

Of course committers should be able to provide high quality code reviews. Personally I found Leiqing's review on my PRs related to SQL function very valuable, even though he was not as familiar with the topic yet. Here are some example PRs:

https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/12743
https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/13384

Here's his recent review on verifier related PR, which is more in his domain of expertise:

https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/13661

Does this resolve your concerns?

Thanks!

Rongrong

 

 

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:08 PM Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...> wrote:

My impression was that it was a requirement that committers demonstrate solid skill in providing high quality code reviews. Do you have evidence of that for Leiqing or is this not a requirement?

 

-Masha

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "jamessun@..." <jamessun@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:05 PM
To: "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong


Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

Ariel Weisberg
 

Hi,

This vote didn't achieve quorum and is non-binding. Please read the TSC bylaws https://github.com/prestodb/tsc/blob/6fd035ab15d9eb33603e3add99afa290681a0183/CHARTER.md

Electronic votes require 100% participation from the TSC:
"c. Except as provided in Section 8.c. and 9.a, decisions by vote at a meeting requires a majority vote of those in attendance, provided a quorum is met. Decisions made by electronic vote without a meeting requires a majority vote of all voting members of the TSC."

Additionally according to 3.a.i:
"i. When there are less than six Related Company Groups represented on the TSC, no one Related Company Group will submit more than one vote when a TSC decision requires a vote."
I see that Facebook has submitted several votes. People need to be aware that Facebook can only submit one binding vote on any issue.

It seems we have already publicly represented this vote as concluded:

The vote hasn't even been agreed upon as concluded in this mailing list thread in addition to not having followed the bylaws.

It's critical that we move forward as a community not a collection of individuals. We have to wait for consensus and follow the agreed upon practices for decisions making.

There is a TSC meeting today at 12PM Eastern, 9AM Pacific. I encourage people to attend so we can achieve quorum and have a discussion and vote on this issue.

Regards,
Ariel

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019, at 7:01 AM, Maria Basmanova wrote:

I expect committers to have substantial expertise on a subset of core parts of the engine. The verifier scope is quite limited and having committer with expertise in just that area is of limited value. Furthermore, I expect to-be-committers to have a track record of providing quality reviews and approving PRs such that existing committers don’t need to review the code and can trust the to-be-committers approval. In other words, I’d expect to see existing committers delegating code reviews to to-be-committers on a regular basis. I don’t see evidence of that.

 

-Masha

 

From: Rongrong <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:27 PM
To: Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...>
Cc: James Sun <jamessun@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

Of course committers should be able to provide high quality code reviews. Personally I found Leiqing's review on my PRs related to SQL function very valuable, even though he was not as familiar with the topic yet. Here are some example PRs:


Here's his recent review on verifier related PR, which is more in his domain of expertise:


Does this resolve your concerns?

Thanks!

Rongrong

 

 

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:08 PM Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...> wrote:

My impression was that it was a requirement that committers demonstrate solid skill in providing high quality code reviews. Do you have evidence of that for Leiqing or is this not a requirement?

 

-Masha

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "jamessun@..." <jamessun@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:05 PM
To: "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong




Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

Brian Warner <bwarner@...>
 

Hi all,

We can discuss some best practices around this at the TSC meeting today.  I can offer up some suggestions based upon how we run votes in other projects, both in-person and via email.  To be honest, the biggest thing is staying organized so the votes are taken and recorded consistently.  Gale and I can help with this part.

Best,
Brian

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 10:01 AM Ariel Weisberg <ariel@...> wrote:
Hi,

This vote didn't achieve quorum and is non-binding. Please read the TSC bylaws https://github.com/prestodb/tsc/blob/6fd035ab15d9eb33603e3add99afa290681a0183/CHARTER.md

Electronic votes require 100% participation from the TSC:
"c. Except as provided in Section 8.c. and 9.a, decisions by vote at a meeting requires a majority vote of those in attendance, provided a quorum is met. Decisions made by electronic vote without a meeting requires a majority vote of all voting members of the TSC."

Additionally according to 3.a.i:
"i. When there are less than six Related Company Groups represented on the TSC, no one Related Company Group will submit more than one vote when a TSC decision requires a vote."
I see that Facebook has submitted several votes. People need to be aware that Facebook can only submit one binding vote on any issue.

It seems we have already publicly represented this vote as concluded:

The vote hasn't even been agreed upon as concluded in this mailing list thread in addition to not having followed the bylaws.

It's critical that we move forward as a community not a collection of individuals. We have to wait for consensus and follow the agreed upon practices for decisions making.

There is a TSC meeting today at 12PM Eastern, 9AM Pacific. I encourage people to attend so we can achieve quorum and have a discussion and vote on this issue.

Regards,
Ariel

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019, at 7:01 AM, Maria Basmanova wrote:

I expect committers to have substantial expertise on a subset of core parts of the engine. The verifier scope is quite limited and having committer with expertise in just that area is of limited value. Furthermore, I expect to-be-committers to have a track record of providing quality reviews and approving PRs such that existing committers don’t need to review the code and can trust the to-be-committers approval. In other words, I’d expect to see existing committers delegating code reviews to to-be-committers on a regular basis. I don’t see evidence of that.

 

-Masha

 

From: Rongrong <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:27 PM
To: Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...>
Cc: James Sun <jamessun@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

Of course committers should be able to provide high quality code reviews. Personally I found Leiqing's review on my PRs related to SQL function very valuable, even though he was not as familiar with the topic yet. Here are some example PRs:


Here's his recent review on verifier related PR, which is more in his domain of expertise:


Does this resolve your concerns?

Thanks!

Rongrong

 

 

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:08 PM Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...> wrote:

My impression was that it was a requirement that committers demonstrate solid skill in providing high quality code reviews. Do you have evidence of that for Leiqing or is this not a requirement?

 

-Masha

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "jamessun@..." <jamessun@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:05 PM
To: "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong





--

Brian Warner
The Linux Foundation
+1 724 301-6171


Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

Ariel Weisberg
 

Hi,

3.a.i changed since I last read it and I didn't notice. Full participation is not required anymore!

Sorry!
Ariel

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019, at 10:00 AM, Ariel Weisberg wrote:
Hi,

This vote didn't achieve quorum and is non-binding. Please read the TSC bylaws https://github.com/prestodb/tsc/blob/6fd035ab15d9eb33603e3add99afa290681a0183/CHARTER.md

Electronic votes require 100% participation from the TSC:
"c. Except as provided in Section 8.c. and 9.a, decisions by vote at a meeting requires a majority vote of those in attendance, provided a quorum is met. Decisions made by electronic vote without a meeting requires a majority vote of all voting members of the TSC."

Additionally according to 3.a.i:
"i. When there are less than six Related Company Groups represented on the TSC, no one Related Company Group will submit more than one vote when a TSC decision requires a vote."
I see that Facebook has submitted several votes. People need to be aware that Facebook can only submit one binding vote on any issue.

It seems we have already publicly represented this vote as concluded:

The vote hasn't even been agreed upon as concluded in this mailing list thread in addition to not having followed the bylaws.

It's critical that we move forward as a community not a collection of individuals. We have to wait for consensus and follow the agreed upon practices for decisions making.

There is a TSC meeting today at 12PM Eastern, 9AM Pacific. I encourage people to attend so we can achieve quorum and have a discussion and vote on this issue.

Regards,
Ariel

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019, at 7:01 AM, Maria Basmanova wrote:

I expect committers to have substantial expertise on a subset of core parts of the engine. The verifier scope is quite limited and having committer with expertise in just that area is of limited value. Furthermore, I expect to-be-committers to have a track record of providing quality reviews and approving PRs such that existing committers don’t need to review the code and can trust the to-be-committers approval. In other words, I’d expect to see existing committers delegating code reviews to to-be-committers on a regular basis. I don’t see evidence of that.

 

-Masha

 

From: Rongrong <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:27 PM
To: Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...>
Cc: James Sun <jamessun@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

Of course committers should be able to provide high quality code reviews. Personally I found Leiqing's review on my PRs related to SQL function very valuable, even though he was not as familiar with the topic yet. Here are some example PRs:



Here's his recent review on verifier related PR, which is more in his domain of expertise:





Does this resolve your concerns?

Thanks!

Rongrong

 

 

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:08 PM Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...> wrote:

My impression was that it was a requirement that committers demonstrate solid skill in providing high quality code reviews. Do you have evidence of that for Leiqing or is this not a requirement?

 

-Masha

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "jamessun@..." <jamessun@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:05 PM
To: "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 


I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).




Thanks!
Rongrong






Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

rongrong100@...
 

> I expect committers to have substantial expertise on a subset of core parts of the engine. The verifier scope is quite limited and having committer with expertise in just that area is of limited value.

I mostly agree with this, which is why when James proposed to add Leiqing earlier I pointed out that he mostly only worked on verifier, which might not be of enough scope. I changed my mind and decided to nominate him because I think there's still great value in this. Leiqing is the expert on verifier and the new benchmark work is very much related to verifier. His code review is of high quality and I rarely found myself needing to add additional comments. So at least in these sub-systems, he "had a track record of providing quality reviews and approving PRs such that existing committers don’t need to review the code and can trust the to-be-committers approval". If we have an area committership model I'd nominate him as the area committer for these limited scopes. I don't see any value in having to insert me, or any other committer in these reviews to merge code. None of the committers know every subsystems in the code base, and we trust them to say "I'm not the right person to review, please ask xxx instead". And I trust Leiqing to do the same on other subjects he's not familiar with.

> Furthermore, I expect to-be-committers to have a track record of providing quality reviews and approving PRs such that existing committers don’t need to review the code and can trust the to-be-committers approval. In other words, I’d expect to see existing committers delegating code reviews to to-be-committers on a regular basis. I don’t see evidence of that.

I agree with this point. Except that I saw evidence. When you said you "don't see evidence of that", do you mean that you haven't worked with him thus haven't seen his work, or that you've seen evidence that he didn't meet the bar?

Overall what I want to achieve with this nomination is the experts in the subsystems could have some autonomy on the subsystems they build. If committer is not the right way to do it, please propose different solutions. I don't want to be the artificial gate keeper because I don't see myself adding any value to the process. If someone else want to volunteer for doing all final reviews on verifier / benchmark runner, please go ahead.

Thanks!
Rongrong


On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 4:01 AM Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...> wrote:

I expect committers to have substantial expertise on a subset of core parts of the engine. The verifier scope is quite limited and having committer with expertise in just that area is of limited value. Furthermore, I expect to-be-committers to have a track record of providing quality reviews and approving PRs such that existing committers don’t need to review the code and can trust the to-be-committers approval. In other words, I’d expect to see existing committers delegating code reviews to to-be-committers on a regular basis. I don’t see evidence of that.

 

-Masha

 

From: Rongrong <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:27 PM
To: Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...>
Cc: James Sun <jamessun@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

Of course committers should be able to provide high quality code reviews. Personally I found Leiqing's review on my PRs related to SQL function very valuable, even though he was not as familiar with the topic yet. Here are some example PRs:

https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/12743
https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/13384

Here's his recent review on verifier related PR, which is more in his domain of expertise:

https://github.com/prestodb/presto/pull/13661

Does this resolve your concerns?

Thanks!

Rongrong

 

 

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:08 PM Masha Basmanova <mbasmanova@...> wrote:

My impression was that it was a requirement that committers demonstrate solid skill in providing high quality code reviews. Do you have evidence of that for Leiqing or is this not a requirement?

 

-Masha

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "jamessun@..." <jamessun@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 4:05 PM
To: "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>, "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

+1 for making Leiqing as a committer. I was originally thinking making him an incubating committer as well.

 

From: <presto-tsc@...> on behalf of "rongrong100@..." <rongrong100@...>
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM
To: "presto-tsc@..." <presto-tsc@...>
Subject: [presto-tsc] Nominating Leiqing as new committer

 

I want to nominate Leiqing (github: caithagoras) as a committer for Presto. Leiqing started working on Presto about 2 years ago. Recently he has become an expert in release verification and led the effort on improving verifier and release process. He has contributed 128 commits so far. Here's stats from Github:

129 commits  20,597 ++  10,766 --

Please voice your opinions and cast your vote by end of this week (Friday 11/22/19).


Thanks!
Rongrong


Updates to CONTRIBUTING.md

Brian Warner <bwarner@...>
 

Presto TSC,

I wanted to let you know that I'm about to submit PRs to update the CONTRIBUTING.md file in the following repos:
  • benchto
  • docker-images
  • f8-2019-demo
  • presto
  • presto-go-client
  • presto-hadoop-apache2
  • presto-maven-plugin
  • presto-pinot-driver
  • presto-python-client
  • presto-spark-core
  • prestodb
  • RPresto
  • testing-mysql-server
In each case, the change will remove the reference to the Facebook CLA, and replace it with instructions relevant to the CLA tool used by Presto Foundation.

During the last meeting, we discussed having a default CONTRIBUTING.md file in the prestodb/.github repo.  This is a temporary measure until we define the contents of that file.  At that point, maintainers can make the call whether to keep a separate CONTRIBUTING.md file in a repo, or to remove the local version and use the default.

I'll be pushing branches and submitting PRs shortly.  If you have any questions, please let me know.

Best,
Brian

--

Brian Warner
The Linux Foundation
+1 724 301-6171

1 - 20 of 295