hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Allen Wittenauer ...@altiscale.com>
Subject Re: Status: hadoop-common precommit
Date Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:39:17 GMT

On Oct 19, 2015, at 12:25 PM, Andrew Wang <andrew.wang@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> 
> I do agree we should fix these usages of build/test/data, but I don't
> follow the logic regarding running RAT after tests. The point of the
> precommit RAT check is to avoid introducing things to the source tarball
> that fail RAT, and test output is not part of the source tar ball.

	Yup. Which is why it’s bad that test data is getting written to the source area of the
tree.

> It's not
> intended to detect issues if an RM incorrectly builds a release, the RM and
> PMC always need to run RAT again when voting on a release. We don't run
> precommit on releases, so this "RAT after tests" check wouldn't help detect
> bad release tar balls.
> 
> Point being, RAT is not supposed to be used to catch naughty tests that
> operate outside target/, so let's not use it as such. These RAT errors,
> although they helped us find some test issues, are unrelated to the release
> process and thus spurious.

	I just had a very timely discussion with a dev here who is working on their first patch.
 They asked why sometimes (the trunk-version of) test-patch threw rat errors and sometimes
it didn’t.  After chatting, they were running it in dirty workspace mode after manually
running unit tests.

	Sometimes it isn’t about people with positions.
Mime
View raw message