Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

"Feature maintainers" groups to collaboratively manage IS #1633

Open
5 tasks
rishabhshuklax opened this issue Feb 19, 2020 · 44 comments · Fixed by #1719
Open
5 tasks

"Feature maintainers" groups to collaboratively manage IS #1633

rishabhshuklax opened this issue Feb 19, 2020 · 44 comments · Fixed by #1719
Labels
discussion support

Comments

@rishabhshuklax
Copy link
Member

rishabhshuklax commented Feb 19, 2020 •
edited by harshkhandeparkar

Similar to the one discussed in publiclab/plots2#6501 we should have maintainers groups in IS to collaboratively manage different features of IS this would help in maintaining the library more efficiently, Features around which we can develop a team around includes:

  • core-maintainers:
    GOALS: Stability and optimization of the core library.
    CURRENT PRIORITIES: Fix deprecated libraries. eg: readPixels and savePixels are actually not maintained and in fact, do not work at all for GIFs.

  • module-maintainers:
    GOALS: Increasing the number of modules, stability/optimization of existing modules. Ensuring that creating new modules remains easy and accessible and well documented. Developing and maintaining compelling use-cases for IS, as in database/gallery of important/cool sequences #1480.
    CURRENT PRIORITIES: Increasing module GIF support and fixing bugs.

  • ui-maintainers
    GOALS: Stability and performance.
    CURRENT PRIORITIES: Fixing UI bugs and perhaps refactoring some of the old, unmanageable code.

  • tests-maintainers:
    GOALS: Increasing test coverage.
    CURRENT PRIORITIES: Increasing UI test coverage. Module and GIF tests are messy and decoupled, this needs to change as these tests are breaking unexpectedly.

  • cli-maintainers:
    GOALS: maintain existing features and expand test suite.
    CURRENT PRIORITIES: completing initial CLI test suite and covering all basic usages

What do you guys think?

@publiclab/is-reviewers @publiclab/support @publiclab/mentors

cc: @jywarren
@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

This is an awesome idea.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Mar 3, 2020

Agreed!

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

@jywarren there are many cooked bug fix PRs which have not been merged. And you are very busy I see. Can I get temporary merge permissions to continue with the bug fix event?

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

Hi @harshkhandeparkar it has been really tough to keep up. Do we have a prioriy or urgent label you can highlight them to me on? And, you can always bump them up to me in https://gitter.im/publiclab/publiclab -- thank you so much! Hope everyone is safe and doing well. ❤️

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

I think almost all PRs are outdated and inactive at this point 😅.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Jul 5, 2020

Hi @harshkhandeparkar after #1668 perhaps we can get ahead of this again now! It dramatically simplifies the review process. Thank you and hope you're well!

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Jul 5, 2020 •
edited

though, noting #1681 as well...

Update: fixed!! 🎉

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

It works really well!

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

Thanks for all the reviews and issue cleanup!

@jywarren jywarren pinned this issue Jul 12, 2020
@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 1, 2020

Ah, thought of a new one -- cli-maintainers -- pending the CLI tests in #1694

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 1, 2020

Can folks volunteer for a specific one and we can start creating the CODEOWNERS listing? Thank you all!!!

@rishabhshuklax
Copy link
Member Author

I could help out in maintaining modules and core functionalities, while working on #1564 I had to go through a lot of code related to these

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

definitely module and core! I love cli but idk what changes can be made to it ¯_(ツ)_/¯

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 1, 2020 via email

@jywarren jywarren mentioned this issue Oct 6, 2020
Merged
5 tasks
@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 6, 2020

Awesome, @daemon1024 is working on an initial CLI test suite and is interested in being a feature maintainer for the CLI featureset, whose goal is maintain existing features and expand test suite. Awesome!

OK, if we can get some similar descriptions/goals for other featuresets, we can create the initial CODEOWNERS file. Thanks, all!

  • core-maintainers - goals: GOALS HERE: @blurry-x-face @harshkhandeparkar
  • ui-maintainers - goals: maintain and refine existing demo UI, expand test coverage, use generic UI CSS classes to enable other UIs to be tested against if possible, maintain separation of UI code from rest of codebase:
  • tests-maintainers - goals: expand and maintain test suites and related documentation, increase coverage:
  • cli-maintainers - goals: maintain existing features and expand test suite: @daemon1024
  • module-maintainers - goals: GOALS HERE: @blurry-x-face @harshkhandeparkar

What do we think about core goals or test or module goals? I think core ought to be "stability, optimization, backwards-compatibility" maybe?

Modules... one could be "making sure it's simple to create new modules" and "standardizing module code and documentation"

Tests... maybe "ensure test parity across various use cases including CLI, Node, and browser"? and more?

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

Should we add this list of goals to the issue body?

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

Anyone here can edit and add the goals.

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

harshkhandeparkar commented Oct 6, 2020 •
edited

I believe core should be "stability, performance and future compatibility". I think we are just breaking IS further due to backwards compatibility and no one uses old browsers with IS anyway. And also, some parts of IS are anyway not compatible with old browsers and node <10 ig.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 6, 2020

Oh sorry, so this is a good reason to write these together -- i should clarify - i meant backwards compatibility as in no breaking changes and no adverse effects on existing functions, including core, modules, ui and cli. And yes, we can keep compiling these at the top!

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

@jywarren I have added some of the goals and priorities to the issue body, please check it out :)

cc: @blurry-x-face @daemon1024

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

The priorities are absolutely tentative, I just wrote whatever came to my mind.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 7, 2020

OK awesome i like them a lot. I propose for module goals:

GOALS: Increasing the number of modules, stability/optimization of existing modules.

to add: also, ensuring that creating new modules remains easy and accessible and well documented

And: "developing compelling use cases for sequences to show off IS functionality, as in #1480"

what do you think?

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

Sure, I'll add it.

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

harshkhandeparkar commented Oct 7, 2020 •
edited

Umm, should child teams of is-maintainers be made? We can add these priorities and goals there.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 7, 2020 via email

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

I think teams can be codeowners according to this official blog post.
https://github.blog/2017-07-06-introducing-code-owners/
image
That(github/js) looks like a team

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 7, 2020 via email

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

If @blurry-x-face confirms the list then ig we are good to go.

@rishabhshuklax
Copy link
Member Author

Yea @harshkhandeparkar goals and pririties looks good to me, we can continue with this :)

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Oct 8, 2020 via email

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

Umm. I don't exactly know what a CODEOWNERS file is 😂.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

Ah, my apologies - the CODEOWNERS file is what drives this feature -- see this PR -- https://github.com/publiclab/plots2/pull/6502/files

Make sense? what do you think?

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

Where can I find the docs for it?

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

Actually, I don't really need to. @jywarren Can you make the teams though?

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

Done! https://github.com/orgs/publiclab/teams/is-maintainers

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

OK, folks, invited you too -- but i set the checks to 2 approvals required just while we try this system out. Thanks, let's take it one step at a time and we can prob lower that threshold soon.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

@tech4GT @Divy123 any interest in joining a feature maintainers team? ❤️

@jywarren jywarren mentioned this issue Oct 14, 2020
Merged
5 tasks
@Divy123
Copy link
Member

Divy123 commented Oct 15, 2020

@jywarren I would be most interested but I would like to start work on the project once again first and see some of the amazing recent advancements, it has made to which I get accustomed to!!!

Thanks a lot for considering! Will love to be a part here soon!!

@harshkhandeparkar harshkhandeparkar unpinned this issue Oct 15, 2020
@jywarren
Copy link
Member

Hi all! How are we feeling about the workflow, given we just published a new release, we now have a checklist for releases #1692 and we are getting ready with both a project and a milestone for v3.6.1 or v3.7.0?

Should we drop the # of reviews required down to 1? Or are we OK as it is? Also, i'll re-open this so we can recruit more maintainers and just have more dialogue. Thank you!

@jywarren jywarren reopened this Oct 30, 2020
@jywarren jywarren pinned this issue Oct 30, 2020
@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

(I couldn't find a better issue to discuss this)
@jywarren Can we please use a "project" instead of a milestone for v3.7.0 since a project makes it much easier to organize the issues and PRs separately and it also has multiple columns (one for issues, one for closed issues, one for PRs etc)
Refer to the v3.6.1 project.

Thanks.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Nov 1, 2020

Sure, i was just more familiar with milestones. Do you think all the existing entries in the v.3.7.0 milestone could go into the 3.6.1 project, and secondly, do you want to rename 3.6.1 project to 3.7.0? What are your thoughts? thanks!

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

I am ok with both.

@harshkhandeparkar
Copy link
Member

I just created a sort-of template release project.
image
We can copy this from the menu.

@jywarren
Copy link
Member

jywarren commented Nov 2, 2020 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
discussion support
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Create CODEOWNERS publiclab/image-sequencer
4 participants
@jywarren @Divy123 @harshkhandeparkar @rishabhshuklax