Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flink.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANC1h_sSs1TnBh23YcQbn7kd_TvD2QGfSUdR_D4pFsO0F_W4wA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <29278DF1-5877-4503-B9ED-70B218BE1D3B@greghogan.com>
 <CAKiyyaHieGeUAUPfqTFoof6+WRJ_qJPKrEtXQ8H0x_Cd1tO_bQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABW0-Kcy7CeptJAvJjcF97J7paT_4j=eHG9W78uSMvsVMf_50w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANC1h_vTY0QgZi=xY4wFrTsa51U-sVn9_Y-4OVmP0MJ8=h442g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKiyyaHY4Po=EVEjoNSi2H2fTimere8_UO8UuibUk2Gbh+xM-g@mail.gmail.com> <CANC1h_sSs1TnBh23YcQbn7kd_TvD2QGfSUdR_D4pFsO0F_W4wA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bowen Li <bowen.li@offerupnow.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:28:30 -0700
Message-ID: <CABW0-KeaYszQEOtZSd3xJ6orb59NK1+OzYXgeE-1DZ5CQhD8yA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] TravisCI status on GitHub Page
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f0938b32f7d054b4455dd
archived-at: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:29:19 -0000

--001a113f0938b32f7d054b4455dd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

ok, fair enough

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:

> @Bowen Li
>
> There are various discussions currently about reworking repository
> structure, tests, even switching CI services.
> I would be up for revisiting this questions once we care confident that t=
he
> CI infrastructure does not mark "good state" as "broken".
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > The tag says "errored" in case of the timeout.
> >
> > But I don't think it's a worthwhile discussion to have, so I just
> > reverted the commit.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Copying my answer from JIRA:
> > >
> > > Many builds are marked as "failed" these days simply due to exceeding
> the
> > > 50 minute limit in one profile.
> > > The status kind of makes the project look bad without a reason.
> > >
> > > We have quasi never a broken master, and currently not even flaky tes=
ts
> > :-)
> > > For a code base of that size, that's a remarkable job by the communit=
y.
> > > Would be a pity if this is reflected differently to the works for
> reasons
> > > of timeouts and build infrastructure issues.
> > >
> > > I am +1 for removing the tag.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:51 AM, Bowen Li <bowen.li@offerupnow.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I would argue for benefits of having build status.
> > >>
> > >> Instead of letting people go through all docs and wikis to find how
> > Flink
> > >> build system works, it guides people directly to where builds actual=
ly
> > >> happen and ramps up new contributors faster. When my local tests fai=
l
> > >> during development, the homepage is the single place I would like to
> > visit
> > >> and find out if my local errors are from master branch.
> > >>
> > >> It also reminds everyone in the community that what the state of our
> > >> project is - failing? check out errors directly and fix them, also
> > remind
> > >> yourself be cautious when developing code; passing? that's great, an=
d
> > >> everyone in this project has been doing an excellent job!
> > >>
> > >> I don't like to pretend the project is healthy and stable all the ti=
me
> > >> because it is not and will never be. Removing a way that problems
> > surface
> > >> is not a way to make it better. I feel it actually gives people a
> > positive
> > >> impression that Flink is an up-to-date project, because older projec=
ts
> > >> don't usually have it according to my observation.
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:20 AM, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I merged the PR and therefore obviously think it's fine. ;-) Didn'=
t
> > >> > see Robert's comment in the issue though ("We once had the travis
> > >> > build status badge in our readme, but decided to remove it, becaus=
e
> it
> > >> > often shows "Build failed" due to travis issues etc.
> > >> > This gives people the impression that our builds are very
> unstable").
> > >> >
> > >> > It's actually not just an impression, but actually true that the
> > >> > builds are unstable (even if recently it's "mostly" caused by
> > >> > timeouts). Since we are actively working on improving this situati=
on
> > >> > with the repository split, I think it does not hurt having it ther=
e.
> > >> > If others disagree, we can revert it.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Greg Hogan <code@greghogan.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> > > We are now showing the TravisCI build status on Flink=E2=80=99s =
GitHub
> > page. I
> > >> > think Robert=E2=80=99s comment in Jira may have gone unnoticed whe=
n the PR
> was
> > >> > committed.
> > >> > >   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6122 <
> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6122>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > If not yet seeing the benefit even if builds were typically
> passing.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Greg
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
>

--001a113f0938b32f7d054b4455dd--