asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ildar Absalyamov <ildar.absalya...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [IMPORTANT] Git issues
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2015 04:43:44 GMT
So In the meantime, what’s the proper way to pull the master in order to make a code review?

> On Jul 13, 2015, at 20:05, abdullah alamoudi <bamousaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> This is not a big deal. we can figure that out once a solution to the
> current issue is agreed on.
> 
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Ian Maxon <imaxon@uci.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Yeah, I guess we have no choice but to mangle Gerrit to incorporate
>> this commit somehow, unfortunately. There's no way to have the review
>> actually close on that commit. Hopefully it'll let me rebase it ontop
>> of that, but I'm afraid it'll say there's no difference between them.
>> 
>> -Ian
>> 
>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 7:59 PM, abdullah alamoudi <bamousaa@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I am still trying to figure out how to do this but after David's
>> comment, I
>>> am not sure that would be the way to go.
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Ian Maxon <imaxon@uci.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In Gerrit itself, it's not an issue. I was just able to rebase it
>>>> cleanly (there's no substantive difference between the two changes).
>>>> Are you able to do similarly on your local branch?
>>>> 
>>>> -I an
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 7:40 PM, abdullah alamoudi <bamousaa@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Unfortunately, I have rebased one of my branches under code review
>> with
>>>>> this and submitted a new batch to the review.
>>>>> 
>>>>> How should this be handled?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 5:15 AM, Ian Maxon <imaxon@uci.edu> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> After careful consideration, and some experimentation, this is the
>>>>>> best plan as I see it:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The last commit we have in ASF master right now
>>>>>> (c66d23a5ac65ec5218ee47134aea423fd62a32cc) is not one that we wish
to
>>>>>> keep. It's basically the correct commit content-wise, but the message
>>>>>> and hence hash are wrong and needlessly conflict with Gerrit's proper
>>>>>> version (900bf1345410264e9b48469da93ccbd831920d2e). Resolving the
>>>>>> issue by rewinding or restoring Gerrit from backup would involve
both
>>>>>> rewriting history on Gerrit's master branch by rewinding it and
>>>>>> cherry-picking commits onto it, and ugly surgery to Gerrit's internal
>>>>>> database. Therefore a force push to ASF git to overwrite the
>> incorrect
>>>>>> commit, with the correct commit that currently resides in Gerrit's
>>>>>> master, is likely the least painful option.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The only complicating fact of course, is if anyone has pulled
>> c66d23a5
>>>>>> to their master branch, or merged it into any feature branches. For
>>>>>> the former case, just performing a git reset --HARD to master once
>> the
>>>>>> force-update is performed should suffice. For the latter case, some
>>>>>> less simple git-fu will probably be in order (checking out to last
>>>>>> common ancestor, then re-merging would likely be simplest).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm open to thoughts/suggestions/objections. Rewriting history in
git
>>>>>> is not something to be taken lightly, so I want to be sure everyone's
>>>>>> in agreement and aware of what's going to happen.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - Ian
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Ian Maxon <imaxon@uci.edu>
wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Jochen,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We use Gerrit as a code review platform. It works pretty well
I
>> would
>>>>>>> say. The way we had it set up at one point pre-incubation (which
>> was
>>>>>>> preferable, and AFAIK impossible in ASF) was that nobody could
>>>>>>> directly commit to the "reference" repository. It had to go through
>>>>>>> Gerrit, and be reviewed and verified, and then submitted. The
>> reason
>>>>>>> for this mixup is that now folks have to take the commits from
>> Gerrit,
>>>>>>> and submit them to the ASF repo outside of Gerrit, instead of
it
>> being
>>>>>>> a commit hook. As with anything git, this part is kind of like
>> working
>>>>>>> with a loaded gun. We have a script that makes this easier and
less
>>>>>>> error-prone, but there's a corner case apparently where where
one
>> can
>>>>>>> submit things that aren't actually verified in Gerrit (or the
>> script
>>>>>>> wasn't used, not sure which).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> - Ian
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
>>>>>>> <jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi, Ian,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> the information that I read from your mail is that there
are
>>>> currently
>>>>>>>> two Git repositories in use: One being the "official apache
>>>>>>>> repository", the other being the repository with the "Gerrit
>> master
>>>>>>>> branch".
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Is that impression correct? If so, what are the reasons?
And what
>> can
>>>>>>>> we do to fix that?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Jochen
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Ian Maxon <imaxon@uci.edu>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>>>>> If you haven't pulled from
>>>>>>>>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-asterixdb.git
>>>>>>>>> (i.e. asterixdb's official apache repository) lately,
please
>> don't
>>>>>>>>> until you get an email giving the all-clear. Same goes
for
>>>> submitting
>>>>>>>>> and merging patches from Gerrit. Something inadvertently
got
>>>> committed
>>>>>>>>> to the head of the ASF master branch, which does not
exactly
>> agree
>>>>>>>>> with the head of Gerrit's master branch, so they are
diverged at
>> the
>>>>>>>>> moment.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Additionally, if in your AsterixDB repository, 'git rev-parse
>>>>>>>>> asf/master' returns c66d23a5ac65ec5218ee47134aea423fd62a32cc
,
>>>> please
>>>>>>>>> reply to this so we know who might be affected. This
means you
>> have
>>>>>>>>> the latest from the ASF repository- which we may have
to
>> force-push
>>>>>>>>> and overwrite the latest commit from.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> -Ian
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Any world that can produce the Taj Mahal, William Shakespeare,
>>>>>>>> and Stripe toothpaste can't be all bad. (C.R. MacNamara,
One Two
>>>> Three)
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Amoudi, Abdullah.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Amoudi, Abdullah.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Amoudi, Abdullah.

Best regards,
Ildar


Mime
View raw message