hawq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] HAWQ 2.0.0-incubating Release
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:00:15 GMT
Thanks! I've also filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-914
which I would
leave up to Goden to decide how blocking for the 2.0.0.0-incubating
release it really is.

And also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-915 which is
definitely a blocker.

Thanks,
Roman.

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Ting(Goden) Yao <tyao@pivotal.io> wrote:
> I'm reactivating this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-751 (Add
> plr, pgcrypto, gporca into Apache HAWQ)
> We need to review and discuss the original implementation. (re: Roman's
> plr, cryptograph issue)
>
> A few new ones related, could be blocker (-1)
>
>    - *https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-838
>    <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-838> *(add paramiko, which
>    is LGPL <https://github.com/paramiko/paramiko/blob/master/LICENSE>)
>    - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-863 (add pycrypto python
>    module, license file
>    <https://github.com/dlitz/pycrypto/blob/master/COPYRIGHT>seems
>    ambiguous, also introduced dependency for build)
>
> I filed a new JIRA to address:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-913 (please fill in details or
> leave comments)
> "*...I highly recommend having a CI job that runs mvn verify on a regular
> basis..."*
>
> Thrift one was introduced by: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-735
> Please check if we should reopen and address Roman's concerns.
>
> -Goden
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:33 AM Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Radar Da lei <rlei@pivotal.io> wrote:
>> > Hi Goden,
>> >
>> > I have pushed commits of 'HAWQ-892
>> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-892>' and 'HAWQ-901
>> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-901>' into branch
>> > '2.0.0.0-incubating'.
>>
>> Ok, with these two additional commits I presumed the branch was ready
>> for review. I'm not done with the full review yet, but here are the top
>> concerns
>> that would make me -1 this branch if it did go for a vote:
>>    0. mvn verify produces tons of RAT check failures that need to be
>> carefully
>>    analyzed. As an aside -- I highly recommend having a CI job that
>> runs mvn verify
>>    on a regular basis.
>>
>>    1. Pulling source from external repositories in an unconditional way.
>>     There's quite a bit of 'git clone' going on in the build system.
>> The easiest way
>>     to see it all is to run
>>        $ git grep -R 'git ' . | grep clone
>>     My first concern is that all of these calls need to be made
>> conditional. IOW,
>>     I should be able to build a basic HAWQ binary without it doing
>> 'git clone' and
>>     instead relying on pointers to the same binary dependencies provided
>> via
>>     build configuration. This could be a documentation issue and if so
>> I'd appreciate
>>     having it published on the wiki some place.
>>
>>     On top of that, we have two bigger issues with the following repos:
>>         https://github.com/jconway/plr.git  -- GPL
>>         https://github.com/postgres/postgres.git -- Cryptography
>>
>>     We need to make sure that HAWQ can be built with those altogether.'
>>
>>     2. As a minor nit, I see that you imported thrift source under
>> depends/thirdparty/thrift
>>     and it would be great if there were a way to:
>>         2.1. make sure that it is obvious what *release* version of
>> thrift it was
>>         2.2. make sure that it is obvious if anything in there gets patched
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>>

Mime
View raw message