accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: moving rat to a profile?
Date Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:38:40 GMT
Personally, I think that contributors should be patching against the last
released version, not master. Early on Josh argued that we should keep the
master HEAD identical to the latest release, and develop in a development
branch. I didn't fully understand his reasonings back then, but if we were
making that decision now, I'd go for that.


--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii


On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com> wrote:

> This problem is exasperated by our development model. We tell people to
> clone our repo, which puts them on master by default. Then we tell them to
> work against the oldest branch that has the bug, which is almost always
> going to be 1.6 and sometimes even 1.5. After switching branches, they'll
> have the extra modules laying around, and unless they know to look for them
> are going to get bit by the RAT check. This is something that happens for
> almost every single new contributor, and we saw it come up several times
> during the hackathon.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't know that this will help much.
> >
> > We already have a *lot* for new contributors to keep track of. If they
> miss
> > the step of running maven clean, they end up exactly where we are now.
> >
> > The output from the Rat plugin doesn't make it easy to figure out how
> they
> > got into that state, nor how to back out of it. They're likely at a point
> > where they can't easily go back to the branch that could do the clean, so
> > they're back to "add your files and use git clean." Which we already know
> > isn't going great for people.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Billie Rinaldi <
> billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > How about recommending a mvn clean before checking out a new branch?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > My concern with a default-on profile is the same one I have with
> > > > Christopher's suggestion that we recommend -Drat.ignoreErrors=true.
> > > >
> > > > It's going to make the "easy" path one where things aren't checked.
> > > That's
> > > > going to necessitate we check things periodically and during release.
> > > >
> > > > We can just as easily do those checks by activating the profile, e.g.
> > in
> > > a
> > > > jenkins build and in the release script.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Billie Rinaldi <
> > > billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm not thrilled about turning it off by default.  How about
> putting
> > it
> > > > in
> > > > > a profile that would be enabled by default, but could be disabled
> > with
> > > a
> > > > > flag for those who don't understand why it's failing?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I've had a few different new-to-Accumulo contributors recently
> run
> > > into
> > > > > the
> > > > > > issue of Rat failing the build after changing branches.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know we already have a warning about this[1], but AFAICT it's
> > over
> > > > the
> > > > > > threshold for consumable information.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Even after pointing people to the warning, the existing
> workaround
> > > > > tripped
> > > > > > up atleast one of them. Despite the warning about using "git
> > clean,"
> > > > the
> > > > > > destruction of their local IDE changes were surprising.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For contributions to Accumulo that aren't coming from committers,
> > the
> > > > Rat
> > > > > > plugin seems much more likely to give a false positive than
to
> > catch
> > > an
> > > > > > error. Additionally, whatever committer is reviewing the
> > contribution
> > > > > > should be checking for license compliance anyways.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In the interests of reducing the surprise for new contributors,
> I'd
> > > > like
> > > > > to
> > > > > > move our use of Rat to a profile that is only default enabled
> > during
> > > a
> > > > > > release run.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The profile would still let those who want rat to run on every
> > build
> > > to
> > > > > > enable it and we could update the guide for handling new
> > > contributions
> > > > to
> > > > > > say committers should enable the rat profile to help guard
> against
> > > > > errors.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any objections?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]: http://accumulo.apache.org/source.html#running-a-build
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Sean
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sean
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sean
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message