asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Maxon <ima...@uci.edu>
Subject Re: The Great Merge
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2016 00:21:30 GMT
I've gone ahead and tried merging my topic branch with this change, and it
turned out surprisingly well. I really didn't have many issues. I'll
summarize the process:

1) Merge the change from asterixdb with your topic branch checked out, so
just 'git merge hyracks-merge2'.
The only real conflict should be the pom, if you altered that. I found it
easiest to just replicate my changes and take the upstream, rather than
trying anything funny, since usually pom changes are not major.

2) Add your hyracks folder as a remote (for me, 'git remote add
hyracks-local file:///home/...')

3) Merge your hyracks topic branch into asterixdb ( ' git merge
hyracks-local/imaxon/hdfs')
This also worked pretty well, the only extra hiccup besides the pom was
files I had created. Those appeared at the top level again after the merge.
But, all you have to do is move them back down one folder into
hyracks-fullstack.

That's about it really. I went ahead and pushed this up to github as well
so if anyone would like to take a look at the process or check out the
branch to see what happened (at least for me), the branch is here:
https://github.com/parshimers/incubator-asterixdb/tree/imaxon/hdfs-plus-hyracks

Thanks,
-Ian

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Ian Maxon <imaxon@uci.edu> wrote:

> Chris found an issue with the way git histories were being handled in the
> way I merged things, so I have revised the proposed branch:
> https://github.com/parshimers/incubator-asterixdb/commits/hyracks-merge2
>
> Basically I was trying to fit everything into one commit, because I
> thought at first that I could submit it to Gerrit that way. However that
> doesn't work for other reasons, basically Gerrit tries to treat every new
> commit from Hyracks as a new change. Splitting the commits of the
> repository merge fixes the issue.
>
>
> @Till, I think that creating a textual patch would just be more work. If I
> were to do it that way I would try fetching the Gerrit patch, and then
> cherry-picking it onto a new branch that has the hyracks+asterix master as
> the head.
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Till Westmann <tillw@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> To get existing patches in, could we just create a textual patch (e.g.
>> from gerrit), apply that with the necessary -p option to a new local
>> checkout of the merged repositories and submit a new review to gerrit?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Till
>>
>> On 30 Mar 2016, at 12:36, Ian Maxon wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> > I went ahead preliminarily merged the Hyracks and AsterixDB repositories
>> > into one. Unfortunately this can't be reviewed in Gerrit so you all can
>> > check it out here:
>> >
>> https://github.com/parshimers/incubator-asterixdb/tree/imaxon/merge-hyracks
>> >
>> > You will likely have to do some ugly rebasing for whatever changes you
>> > might have open once this gets done, since it moves asterixdb down one
>> > folder and swaps out pom.xml in the repository root. Hyracks is in a
>> > similar situation, though you would want to reapply your change to the
>> > AsterixDB repo from Hyracks (which is a bit odd). If you would like to
>> see
>> > how this affects your branch please do try fetching the branch I linked
>> > above and testing it out on a copy of your topic branch.
>> >
>> > I'm still making sure all of the tests pass but nothing's failed so far.
>> > Unless anyone has objections I think we should push this change either
>> this
>> > week or early next week.
>> >
>> > Let me know what you all think.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > - Ian
>>
>
>

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