Could one of the python committers review the patches for these related issues, it'd be nice to get them in for 1.7.

Thanks,
Marcio

"ant test" fails for both patches.
"patch" fails if I try to apply them both. Can you create a single
patch for both of them.

I other question, I *do* have commit rights but very green to the
development process. Is there a document somewhere that I can refer
to?

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Marcio Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could one of the python committers review the patches for these related issues, it'd be nice to get them in for 1.7.
>
> Thanks,
> Marcio

On 03/13/2012 12:23 PM, Miki Tebeka wrote:
> I other question, I *do* have commit rights but very green to the
> development process. Is there a document somewhere that I can refer
> to?

There are some instructions at:

https://cwiki.apache.org/AVRO/How+To+Contribute#HowToContribute-CommittingGuidelinesforcommitters

If we find that document is missing things then we should update it.

The general flow is something like:
 0. An issue is opened in Jira.  Potential solutions are discussed.
 1. Someone provides a patch in Jira and marks it as "Patch Available".
 2. A committer reviews the patch.
 3. If the reviewer feels it's not ready for commit, reasons are given
and we return to step (0) or (1).
 4. If the patch is acceptable, it is committed and the Jira issue is
resolved.

While reviews are nice to get before commits, we don't strictly require
a review before every commit.  Often committers will say, either of
their own patch or that of someone else, "I'll commit this tomorrow
unless someone objects", then, if no one speaks up, they commit it.  For
trivial, uncontroversial changes like fixing typos, folks often just
commit them immediately.

Does this help?

Doug

> Does this help?
Very much, thanks.

The patch that includes both of the changes was attached to AVRO-301 as
AVRO-301-patch-2.patch.  The third patch was a disentangling of the doc
changes from the unreserved properties patch (if it gets applied first, I'd
have to redo the AVRO-300 patch to avoid merge conflicts).

AVRO-301-patch-2 should apply cleanly against the current trunk, and should
resolve both issues.  Is there a specific failure you saw from your "ant
test", I just tried applying the current AVRO-301 patch to a clean checkout
and it succeeded.  I want to make sure there's not a python version issue
or something I'm missing.

thanks,
Marcio

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Miki Tebeka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> "ant test" fails for both patches.
> "patch" fails if I try to apply them both. Can you create a single
> patch for both of them.
>
> I other question, I *do* have commit rights but very green to the
> development process. Is there a document somewhere that I can refer
> to?
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Marcio Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Could one of the python committers review the patches for these related
> issues, it'd be nice to get them in for 1.7.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Marcio
>

I can't apply https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12513560/AVRO-301-patch-2.patch
against current trunk (rev 1300455). I'm trying "patch -p0 <
AVRO-301-patch-2.path" and it complains that it's reversed patch.
Tried both with reversed or non reversed and both ended with failure.

However I see some (all?) of the code from the patch in svn, did
someone else committed?

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Marcio O Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The patch that includes both of the changes was attached to AVRO-301 as
> AVRO-301-patch-2.patch.  The third patch was a disentangling of the doc
> changes from the unreserved properties patch (if it gets applied first, I'd
> have to redo the AVRO-300 patch to avoid merge conflicts).
>
> AVRO-301-patch-2 should apply cleanly against the current trunk, and should
> resolve both issues.  Is there a specific failure you saw from your "ant
> test", I just tried applying the current AVRO-301 patch to a clean checkout
> and it succeeded.  I want to make sure there's not a python version issue
> or something I'm missing.
>
> thanks,
> Marcio
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Miki Tebeka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "ant test" fails for both patches.
>> "patch" fails if I try to apply them both. Can you create a single
>> patch for both of them.
>>
>> I other question, I *do* have commit rights but very green to the
>> development process. Is there a document somewhere that I can refer
>> to?
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Marcio Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > Could one of the python committers review the patches for these related
>> issues, it'd be nice to get them in for 1.7.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Marcio
>>

On 03/13/2012 08:49 PM, Miki Tebeka wrote:
> I can't apply https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12513560/AVRO-301-patch-2.patch
> against current trunk (rev 1300455). I'm trying "patch -p0 <
> AVRO-301-patch-2.path" and it complains that it's reversed patch.
> Tried both with reversed or non reversed and both ended with failure.

The patch applies cleanly for me on Linux.

~/src/avro/trunk % svn up
At revision 1300671.
~/src/avro/trunk % patch -p 0 < ~/Desktop/AVRO-301-patch-2.patch
patching file lang/py/src/avro/schema.py
patching file lang/py/test/test_schema.py

Doug

Yeah, my bad sorry. (had the patch applied twice).
Tests pass, should I commit?

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 03/13/2012 08:49 PM, Miki Tebeka wrote:
>> I can't apply https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12513560/AVRO-301-patch-2.patch
>> against current trunk (rev 1300455). I'm trying "patch -p0 <
>> AVRO-301-patch-2.path" and it complains that it's reversed patch.
>> Tried both with reversed or non reversed and both ended with failure.
>
> The patch applies cleanly for me on Linux.
>
> ~/src/avro/trunk % svn up
> At revision 1300671.
> ~/src/avro/trunk % patch -p 0 < ~/Desktop/AVRO-301-patch-2.patch
> patching file lang/py/src/avro/schema.py
> patching file lang/py/test/test_schema.py
>
> Doug

On 03/14/2012 01:31 PM, Miki Tebeka wrote:
> Tests pass, should I commit?

If it looks good to you, add a comment on the Jira issue to that effect
and say that you'll commit it tomorrow if no one objects.  Then commit
it tomorrow if no one objects.  Or just commit it today if you think
it's a safe, uncontroversial change.

Doug

On 3/14/12 1:31 PM, "Miki Tebeka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Yeah, my bad sorry. (had the patch applied twice).
>Tests pass, should I commit?
In addition to Doug's comments, make sure you add the appropriate line to
CHANGES.txt when you commit.  Follow the conventions in there, listing the
JIRA ticket and noting the contributor.

OK, it's ready. Will commit tomorrow afternoon.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Scott Carey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3/14/12 1:31 PM, "Miki Tebeka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Yeah, my bad sorry. (had the patch applied twice).
>>Tests pass, should I commit?
>
>
> In addition to Doug's comments, make sure you add the appropriate line to
> CHANGES.txt when you commit.  Follow the conventions in there, listing the
> JIRA ticket and noting the contributor.
>
>