Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 057F7187A8 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:00:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 58224 invoked by uid 500); 12 Nov 2015 18:00:01 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 58138 invoked by uid 500); 12 Nov 2015 18:00:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list common-dev@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 58048 invoked by uid 99); 12 Nov 2015 18:00:00 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:00:00 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 346A5C0044 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:00:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.998 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2=1.999, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-us-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GZQG3J43jsVN for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relayvx11b.securemail.intermedia.net (relayvx11b.securemail.intermedia.net [64.78.52.184]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 17FCB20489 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from securemail.intermedia.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by emg-ca-1-1.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B228C53E73 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:59:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Need for force-push on feature branches MIME-Version: 1.0 x-echoworx-msg-id: a425b655-8544-461b-9c7b-71df598ef61e x-echoworx-emg-received: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:59:58.577 -0800 x-echoworx-action: delivered Received: from 10.254.155.14 ([10.254.155.14]) by emg-ca-1-1 (JAMES SMTP Server 2.3.2) with SMTP ID 312 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:59:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (unknown [10.224.117.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by emg-ca-1-1.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 559E353E7C for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:59:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-1.exch080.serverpod.net (10.224.117.101) by MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (10.224.117.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1130.7; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:59:56 -0800 Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-1.exch080.serverpod.net ([10.224.117.101]) by mbx080-w4-co-1.exch080.serverpod.net ([10.224.117.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1044.021; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:59:57 -0800 From: Steve Loughran To: "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" Thread-Topic: Need for force-push on feature branches Thread-Index: AQHRHAQy5U71H+b3aUyIIRjxrME/bJ6WYR6AgAAEtICAAY5HAIAAsYAAgACNfwCAAALqAA== Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:59:57 +0000 Message-ID: References: <24B40D0D-1ADF-4AD7-910D-586D4F571BED@hortonworks.com> <3D9E3DF7-9017-45F1-AFDB-C82A6073E6FD@hortonworks.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [86.178.206.108] x-source-routing-agent: Processed Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On 12 Nov 2015, at 17:49, Sangjin Lee wrote: >=20 > Yes, I completely understand about the git branch naming practice (in fac= t > that's what I normally do). I was commenting on our hadoop patch naming > convention. We are supposed to use patch names as > "-..patch". >=20 > If we used "feature/HADOOP-12345" as the git branch name and the subtask > JIRA was HADOOP-67890 for example, the patch file name would be > "HADOOP-67890-feature/HADOOP-12345.001.patch", which would not be doable, > no? For that to work, we would need to have some kind of escaping > convention which jenkins and users follow. >=20 aah, now I follow. wouldn't HADOOP-12345.001.patch be enough?