git.net

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] Where do we draw the line?


My 2 cents:
I hope Vladimir realizes that there is a small community of developers who
understand query optimizers and are willing to contribute to it.
Its a complex area and he cannot do it alone.  His constructive comments
are welcome but not the arrogance/mockery in the code review.
Those will absolutely have a negative effect on the health of the project.
We need contributors like Zoltan !   In the PR Jesus suggested to file
a follow-up JIRA and move on.  I don't understand why that's not acceptable
to Vladimir.

thanks,
Aman

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 4:07 AM Zoltan Haindrich <kirk@xxxxxx> wrote:

>
>
> On 10/19/18 3:27 AM, Albert wrote:
> > maybe Zoltan could share his feel on that review, and Vladimir could act
> > correspondingly.
>
> During the review process Vladimir had some good points; I tried to focus
> on those - and tried to overlook he's style - it kinda worked well to just
> see the value in his
> comments - although he never acknowledge any of my concerns - I was not
> against those modifications.
> At the end of that process I was adding assertion messages - I thinked the
> core part of the patch have made it thru the review :)
> A day have passed without any comments... after it got in that
> conversation on the "commit" started...I tried to give my best explanations
> - but when that comment came
> about thumblr: that blow the fuse out...I've written some long message
> about why are we here - but eventually I've cleared most of it; except the
> last few words.
>
> I'm not sure what Vladimir's goal with he's behaviour, but this thing
> kinda take away my willingness to file another ticket...
>
> regards,
> Zoltan
>
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 8:23 AM Ashutosh Chauhan <hashutosh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I have not contributed to Calcite in a while but I keep up with whats
> going
> >> in project and actively follow mailing list and jiras of interest.
> >> I concur with Josh that it is public shaming and bullying. This is not
> >> acceptable. Also, this is not an exception but pattern which tells me
> that
> >> it will continue in future too.
> >> This is not in line with ASF code of conduct and respectful dialog
> expected
> >> in community.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ashutosh
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:24 PM Michael Mior <mmior@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> You can see that I already responded to the comment and I don't really
> >> have
> >>> many further thoughts. I do agree though that it's true that this could
> >>> have been intended humorously and my reaction didn't acknowledge that.
> >> That
> >>> said, it's of course worth considering with comments intended to be
> >>> humorous how they will be perceived.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Michael Mior
> >>> mmior@xxxxxxxxxx
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Le jeu. 18 oct. 2018 à 15:37, Julian Hyde <jhyde@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> >>>
> >>>> I’m not too concerned about the "Do you aim to get an entry in
> >>>> accidentallyquadratic?” comment — it could be interpreted humorously,
> >> if
> >>> it
> >>>> were not at a end of a long, contentious review thread.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am more concerned that it was a long contentious review thread. The
> >>>> problem is that Vladimir is dogmatic. He makes a point, that point is
> >>>> acknowledged by the other party, but he absolutely refuses to give
> >>> ground.
> >>>> This occurs on the issue of messages for assert statements, and on the
> >>>> issue of the O(n ^ 2) performance of the algorithm.
> >>>>
> >>>> There is no path to consensus, other than yielding to Vladimir.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have experienced this behavior also. I had fixed a bug — the
> >> expression
> >>>> “TRUE IS FALSE” was being simplified to TRUE — and Vladimir vetoed my
> >> fix
> >>>> on the “technical grounds” that I had added tests without sufficient
> >>> error
> >>>> messages. The veto left me absolutely furious, and I seriously
> >> considered
> >>>> leaving the community. I surmise that other people who are on the
> >>> receiving
> >>>> end of his criticism may feel the same way.
> >>>>
> >>>> I appreciate Vladimir’s efforts reviewing code, and I appreciate his
> >> high
> >>>> standards, but he needs to change his communication style.
> >>>>
> >>>> Perhaps it would be useful if we discuss under what circumstances a
> >>>> committer can veto a change. ASF policy [1] says the following:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Votes on code modifications follow a different model. In
> >>>>> this scenario, a negative vote constitutes a veto, which
> >>>>> cannot be overridden.
> >>>>
> >>>>> If the R-T-C policy is in effect, a positive vote carries the
> >>>>> very strong implied message, 'I have tested this patch
> >>>>> myself, and found it good.' Similarly, a negative vote
> >>>>> usually means that the patch was tested and found to
> >>>>> be not -good, although the veto (for such it is in this
> >>>>> case) may be based on other technical grounds.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think we need to clarify what “technical grounds" means. Introducing
> >> a
> >>>> security hole would certainly qualify. As would introducing a bug in
> >>>> user-visible functionality (if the same change were not removing a
> more
> >>>> serious bug). But in less clear-cut cases, where the purported
> >> “technical
> >>>> grounds” are disputed or subjective, I think a consensus of other
> >>>> committers should override a veto.
> >>>>
> >>>> To be clear, the “technical grounds” veto is very important. But if
> the
> >>>> threat of it is preventing consensus building, we need to look at it
> >>>> carefully. Removing the veto threat forces reviewers build consensus,
> >> to
> >>>> persuade rather than cajole; it reduces the power of committers over
> >>>> non-committers, and encourages us to treat each other as equals.
> >>>>
> >>>> The commit veto is the “nuclear option” and I, for one, hope that it
> is
> >>>> never used again in this project.
> >>>>
> >>>> Julian
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html <
> >>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Oct 18, 2018, at 11:35 AM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> >>>> jcamachorodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is it OK for a PMC member of this community to engage with a new
> >>>> contributor to the project in this way?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/b470a0cd4572c9f6c4c0e9b51926b97c5af58d3f#r30950660
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I wanted to bring everyone´s attention to the issue because I do not
> >>>> believe this behavior contributes to the health of the project,
> >> welcoming
> >>>> new contributions, etc. The same could have been said in a very
> >> different
> >>>> way, and I do not think Zoltan was engaging disrespectfully.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am not sure whether I am overreacting, I would like to hear others
> >>>> opinion. Does anyone else in the PMC find this disturbing? Does the
> ASF
> >>>> provide clear guidelines about how members of a community should
> engage
> >>>> with each other?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Jesús
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>