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 22:28:33 GMT
Yeah, was thinking that after I clicked send.


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


On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think that depends on the type of thing being patched. A patch that
> fixes a bug makes sense to go against a previously-released version. A
> patch for some new feature does not.
>
>
> On 6/17/14, 2:38 PM, Christopher wrote:
>
>> 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