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

Switch to Plain View
Hadoop, mail # dev - RE: [Vote] Merge branch-trunk-win to trunk


+
Bikas Saha 2013-02-27, 00:30
+
Chris Nauroth 2013-02-27, 06:05
+
Raja Aluri 2013-02-28, 19:17
+
Eric Baldeschwieler 2013-03-01, 04:47
+
Chuan Liu 2013-02-28, 20:21
+
Tsuyoshi OZAWA 2013-03-04, 02:09
+
Harsh J 2013-03-04, 04:50
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-03-04, 18:09
+
Harsh J 2013-03-05, 01:42
+
Matt Foley 2013-03-05, 01:49
+
Steve Loughran 2013-03-06, 13:54
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-03-05, 00:35
+
Matt Foley 2013-03-04, 20:22
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-03-04, 22:30
Copy link to this message
-
Re: [Vote] Merge branch-trunk-win to trunk
Matt Foley 2013-03-04, 23:29
Thanks.  I agree Windows -1's in test-patch should not block commits.

--Matt

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Konstantine, you have voted -1, and stated some requirements before
> you'll
> > withdraw that -1.  As I plan to do work to fulfill those requirements, I
> > want to make sure that what I'm proposing will, in fact, satisfy you.
> > That's why I'm asking, if we implement full "test-patch" integration for
> > Windows, does it seem to you that that would provide adequate support?
>
> Yes.
>
> > I have learned not to presume that my interpretation is correct.  My
> > interpretation of item #1 is that test-patch provides pre-commit build,
> so
> > it would satisfy item #1.  But rather than assuming that I am
> interpreting
> > it correctly, I simply want your agreement that it would, or if not,
> > clarification why it won't.
>
> I agree it will satisfy my item #1.
> I did not agree in my previous email, but I changed my mind based on
> the latest discussion. I have to explain why now.
> I was proposing nightly build because I did not want pre-commit build
> for Windows block commits to Linux. But if people are fine just ignoring
> -1s for the Windows part of the build it should be good.
>
> > Regarding item #2, it is also my interpretation that test-patch provides
> an
> > on-demand (perhaps 20-minutes deferred) Jenkins build and unit test, with
> > logs available to the developer, so it would satisfy item #2.  But rather
> > than assuming that I am interpreting it correctly, I simply want your
> > agreement that it would, or if not, clarification why it won't.
>
> It will satisfy my item #2 in the following way:
> I can duplicate your pre-commit build for Windows and add an input
> parameter, which would let people run the build on their patches
> chosen from local machine rather than attaching them to Jiras.
>
> Thanks,
> --Konstantin
>
> > In agile terms, you are the Owner of these requirements.  Please give me
> > owner feedback as to whether my proposed work sounds like it will satisfy
> > the requirements.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > --Matt
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Didn't I explain in details what I am asking for?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> --Konst
> >>
> >> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Konstantin,
> >> > I'd like to point out two things:
> >> > First, I already committed in this thread (email of Thu, Feb 28, 2013
> at
> >> > 6:01 PM) to providing CI for Windows builds.  So please stop acting
> like
> >> > I'm
> >> > resisting this idea or something.
> >> > Second, you didn't answer my question, you just kvetched about the
> >> > phrasing.
> >> > So I ask again:
> >> >
> >> > Will providing full "test-patch" integration (pre-commit build and
> unit
> >> > test
> >> > triggered by Jira "Patch Available" state) satisfy your request for
> >> > functionality #1 and #2?  Yes or no, please.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > --Matt
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Matt,
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Konstantin,
> >> >> > I would like to explore what it would take to remove this perceived
> >> >> > impediment --
> >> >>
> >> >> Glad you decided to explore. Thank you.
> >> >>
> >> >> > although I reserve the right to argue that this is not
> >> >> > pre-requisite to merging the cross-platform support patch.
> >> >>
> >> >> It's your right indeed. So as mine to question what the platform
> >> >> support means for you, which I believe remained unclear.
> >> >> I do not impede the change as you should have noticed. My requirement
> >> >> comes from my perception of the support, which means to me exactly
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-03-05, 01:00
+
Matt Foley 2013-03-05, 01:41
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-03-25, 20:17
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-03-26, 00:09
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-03-26, 02:14
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-03-26, 05:49
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-03-25, 21:25
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-03-25, 21:53