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

Switch to Plain View
Pig, mail # dev - Re: Our release process


+
Santhosh M S 2012-11-30, 07:16
+
Julien Le Dem 2012-12-01, 01:37
+
Santhosh M S 2012-12-01, 07:46
+
Olga Natkovich 2012-12-04, 20:46
+
Julien Le Dem 2012-12-07, 23:54
+
Olga Natkovich 2012-12-10, 23:22
+
Russell Jurney 2012-12-11, 03:03
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Our release process
Prashant Kommireddi 2012-12-11, 16:54
Share the same concern as Russell here. Not great for the project for
everyone to go "private branch" approach.

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Russell Jurney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Wait. Ack. Do we want everyone to do this? This sounds like fragmentation.
> :(
>
> Russell Jurney twitter.com/rjurney
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If everybody is using a private branch then
> >
> > (1) We are not serving a significant part of our community
> > (2) There is no motivation to contribute those patches to branches (only
> to trunk).
> >
> > Yahoo has been trying hard to work of the Apache branches but if we
> increase the scope of what is going into branches, we will go with private
> branch approach as well.
> >
> > Olga
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Julien Le Dem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Santhosh M S <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, December 7, 2012 3:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: Our release process
> >
> > Here's my criteria for inclusion in a release branch:
> > - no new feature. Only bug fixes.
> > - The criteria is more about stability than priority. The person/group
> > asking for it has a good reason for wanting it in the branch. If
> commiters
> > think the patch is reasonable and won't make the branch unstable then we
> > should check it in. If it breaks something anyway, we revert it.
> >
> > For what it's worth we (at Twitter) maintain an internal branch where we
> > add patches we need and I would suggest anybody that wants to be able to
> > make emergency fixes to their own deployment to do the same. We do keep
> > that branch as close to apache as we can but it has a few patches that
> are
> > in trunk only and do not satisfy the no new feature criteria.
> >
> > What does the PMC think ?
> >
> > Julien
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I am ok with tests running nightly and reverting patches that cause
> >> failures. We used to have that. Does anybody know what happened? Is
> anybody
> >> volunteering to make it work again?
> >>
> >> I would like to see specific criteria for what goes into the branch been
> >> published (rather than case-by-case). This way each team can decided if
> the
> >> criteria stringent enough of if they need to run a private branch.
> >>
> >> Olga
> >>
> >>    ------------------------------
> >> *From:* Santhosh M S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> *To:* Julien Le Dem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> *Cc:* "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> *Sent:* Friday, November 30, 2012 11:46 PM
> >>
> >> *Subject:* Re: Our release process
> >>
> >> HI Julien,
> >>
> >> You are making most of the points that I did on this thread (CI for e2e,
> >> not burdening clean e2e prior to every commit for a release branch). The
> >> only point on which there is no clear agreement is the definition of a
> bug
> >> that can be included in a previously released branch. I am fine with a
> case
> >> by case inclusion.
> >>
> >> Hi Olga,
> >>
> >> Are you fine with Julien's proposal as it stands - bugs that are
> included
> >> will be determined at the time of inclusion instead of doing it now.
> >>
> >> Santhosh
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Julien Le Dem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Santhosh M S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 5:37 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Our release process
> >>
> >> Proposed criteria:
> >> - it makes the tests fail. targets test-commit + test + e2e tests
> >> - a critical bug is reported in a short time frame (definition of
> >> critical not needed as it is rare and can be decided on a case by case
+
Julien Le Dem 2012-12-12, 18:26
+
Olga Natkovich 2012-12-12, 19:08
+
Julien Le Dem 2012-12-13, 00:54
+
Olga Natkovich 2012-12-13, 21:04
+
Jonathan Coveney 2012-12-13, 21:14
+
Olga Natkovich 2012-12-18, 00:16
+
Santhosh M S 2012-12-23, 01:56