flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stephan Ewen (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Created] (FLINK-7263) Improve Pull Request Template
Date Tue, 25 Jul 2017 12:25:00 GMT
Stephan Ewen created FLINK-7263:

             Summary: Improve Pull Request Template
                 Key: FLINK-7263
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7263
             Project: Flink
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: Documentation
            Reporter: Stephan Ewen
            Assignee: Stephan Ewen

As discussed in the mailing list, the suggestion is to update the pull request template as

*Thank you very much for contributing to Apache Flink - we are happy that you want to help
us improve Flink. To help the community review you contribution in the best possible way,
please go through the checklist below, which will get the contribution into a shape in which
it can be best reviewed.*

*Please understand that we do not do this to make contributions to Flink a hassle. In order
to uphold a high standard of quality for code contributions, while at the same time managing
a large number of contributions, we need contributors to prepare the contributions well, and
give reviewers enough contextual information for the review. Please also understand that contributions
that do not follow this guide will take longer to review and thus typically be picked up with
lower priority by the community.*

## Contribution Checklist

  - Make sure that the pull request corresponds to a [JIRA issue](https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/FLINK/issues).
Exceptions are made for typos in JavaDoc or documentation files, which need no JIRA issue.
  - Name the pull request in the form "[FLINK-1234] [component] Title of the pull request",
where *FLINK-1234* should be replaced by the actual issue number. Skip *component* if you
are unsure about which is the best component.
  Typo fixes that have no associated JIRA issue should be named following this pattern: `[hotfix]
[docs] Fix typo in event time introduction` or `[hotfix] [javadocs] Expand JavaDoc for PuncuatedWatermarkGenerator`.

  - Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the pull request. That
will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
  - Make sure that the change passes the automated tests, i.e., `mvn clean verify` 

  - Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from multiple issues.
  - Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message (including the JIRA id)

  - Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text and this checklist,
leaving only the filled out template below.

**(The sections below can be removed for hotfixes of typos)**

## What is the purpose of the change

*(For example: This pull request makes task deployment go through the blob server, rather
than through RPC. That way we avoid re-transferring them on each deployment (during recovery).)*

## Brief change log

*(for example:)*
  - *The TaskInfo is stored in the blob store on job creation time as a persistent artifact*
  - *Deployments RPC transmits only the blob storage reference*
  - *TaskManagers retrieve the TaskInfo from the blob cache*

## Verifying this change

*(Please pick either of the following options)*

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.


This change is already covered by existing tests, such as *(please describe tests)*.


This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

  - *Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads (100MB)*
  - *Extended integration test for recovery after master (JobManager) failure*
  - *Added test that validates that TaskInfo is transferred only once across recoveries*
  - *Manually verified the change by running a 4 node cluser with 2 JobManagers and 4 TaskManagers,
a stateful streaming program, and killing one JobManager and to TaskManagers during the execution,
verifying that recovery happens correctly.*

## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

  - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): **(yes / no)**
  - The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with `@Public(Evolving)`: **(yes
/ no)**
  - The serializers: **(yes / no / don't know)**
  - The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): **(yes / no / don't know)**
  - Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing,
Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: **(yes / no / don't know)**:

## Documentation

  - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? **(yes / no)**
  - If yes, how is the feature documented? **(not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)**

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message