ambari-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Resolution time for issues / development practices
Date Thu, 10 Dec 2015 12:15:18 GMT
Thanks Greg, I agree with everything you said. I see the same with my
current client: They are afraid of any Ambari upgrade they have to do
because of old and new bugs.

Either way I hope to get some feedback from contributors/committers on this.

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Greg Hill <greg.hill@rackspace.com> wrote:

> I mostly agree with what you're saying.  I definitely don't want to kill
> the velocity in Ambari, but it's impossible to keep up with the deluge of
> JIRAs that get opened and fixed in each point release.  2.1.2 had 377
> JIRAs marked as Fixed, 2.2.0 has 719 (639 of those were marked as bugs).
> Is Ambari just that buggy?  Are the tests that insufficient?  It seems
> like we should maybe take a step back as a community and address the
> problems that result in 639 bug fixes in a point release.  That's
> exceedingly high for a project of this size and scope.  Maybe the velocity
> of changes is creating more bugs than it's fixing?  Are code reviews not
> giving sufficient scrutiny to new contributions?  Are there major
> architectural problems that make bugs so common? I hope some of the core
> developers on the project will chime in with their thoughts on how to move
> things in a better direction, because frankly upgrading to 2.2.0 scares
> me.  We're on 2.1.1 and have worked around most of the bugs we've run
> into.  I don't want to find out what new bugs were created by the 1100
> JIRAs that have been closed in the meantime.
>
> I don't mean to call anyone out here.  I just want to see things get
> better.  A new release of Ambari should be seamless. It shouldn't cause
> panic. How can we fix it and how can we get the community involved in
> making it better? As I say this I realize that I haven't contributed as
> much as I've meant to. I'll work on fixing that.
>
> Greg
>
> On 12/9/15, 9:07 AM, "Lars Francke" <lars.francke@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >sorry for yet another mail from a newcomer to the project. There's been a
> >huge discussion (across a couple of threads actually) on the Incubator
> >mailing list recently. It started with the "Concerning Sentry" thread[0].
> >
> >The issue being discussed in that thread is that some feel that
> >discussions
> >and development actually happen outside of Apache and out of sight of
> >other
> >contributors. Having looked at Ambari for two days now I get a very
> >similar
> >feeling here and I would ask and urge you to look at your practices.
> >
> >Just to give some examples these tickets have been created, reviewed and
> >resolved within the last three hours (most within minutes): AMBARI-14290,
> >AMBARI-14288, AMBARI-14289.
> >
> >Two major and one critical issue. In my opinion waiting for at least 24 or
> >48 hours before committing a patch would be good practice as would
> >attaching a patch file to the issue itself as mentioned in my previous
> >mail. Otherwise no potential contributor even has a chance to intervene or
> >give feedback.
> >
> >Thanks for considering.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Lars
> >[0] <
> >
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general/52126/focus=52
> >351
> >>
> >
> >PS: I sent this mail earlier from the wrong account but I don't think it
> >ever made it to the mailing list, if it did please excuse the double post
>
>

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