(This is a discussion I started on Slack but I think this is a better place) Hi! First of all, the Julia community is awesome! Amazing! People are very receptive and really help when the users need. However, I have a small critic (a constructive one, I hope) about the development of Julia itself. …

What an amazing statistical analysis @Skoffer ! Thank you very much!

Would this conversation be in scope for a triage meeting? At this point, it seems like there are a few concrete ideas that have been thrown around as possible improvements to our current developer processes, and it would be a shame to let this drift away without making improvements.

This three year old blog post of mine has some data analysis of closed/open prs and issues. I should update it up to today’s date. Julia has an issue... | Kristoffer Carlsson Software engineer Ah, the good old days of only 1.8k open issues…

Very good analysis @kristoffer.carlsson ! By the way, this GitHub package is amazing!

After reading Julia has an issue… blogpost, I’ve added few updates to initial report. “State of the first PR of new authors” - what is usually happening with the first PR? Well, it is a good thing, that over the years acceptance rate is more or less constant, though in recent years PRs more often…

One observation I have here is that it’s quite easy for PRs to “get lost in the shuffle”. If someone doesn’t happen to review it and give necessary feedback or if the author forgets about it for a while, it’s very easy for it to fall by the wayside. A way to address this would be to have a state mac…

This is awesome! A set of well defined rules for each state will make the workflow more understandable for those who are starting to contribute. Is it possible for the same bot to ping people every, let’s say, 15 days if no activity is seen in the PR? Or is it too spamming?

If you read the descriptions of the manual states, pinging people periodically when manual action is required is part of what is described.

I think I did not understand the text. I interpreted the manual as something that should be done manually by someone, and not something automatically done when a manual action is required. Hence, I thought your description meant that we should be pinging those people manually.

Suggestion to slightly improve Julia development

Community

Tamas_Papp December 3, 2020, 12:13pm 81

I think it would be great to include bump etiquette specific to the project in CONTRIBUTING.md.

Topic		Replies	Views
Making the review process more pleasant for new contributors General Usage github , contributing	59	4323	July 18, 2024
Identifying barriers to new contributions to Julia and its ecosystem Community github , contributing	14	1132	January 5, 2025
Package growth tips and tricks: Creating an organization, triage, better management Community question	8	2436	July 27, 2021
Improving the Julia issue tracker Meta Discussion github	14	1963	July 1, 2022
Why open-source timelines/roadmaps don't work Internals & Design	40	5110	June 26, 2023

Suggestion to slightly improve Julia development

Related topics