From dev-return-14310-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@impala.apache.org Fri Jan 12 20:08:10 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@eu.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@eu.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 609A9180621 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 20:08:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 50B09160C33; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:08:10 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 969E3160C20 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 20:08:09 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 56169 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jan 2018 19:08:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@impala.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@impala.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@impala.apache.org Received: (qmail 56152 invoked by uid 99); 12 Jan 2018 19:08:08 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:08:08 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 10C0E1808C4 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:08:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.121 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cloudera.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yZFKLK-5pHIv for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:08:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf0-f49.google.com (mail-lf0-f49.google.com [209.85.215.49]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 5AE345F24C for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:08:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f49.google.com with SMTP id h137so7006472lfe.8 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:08:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudera.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=VrgQGtZiMF4Nacr21ZXiB9fK/bilSo1PRK2RMj77CuA=; b=RX77uVw0cvqr7sivEhFqWsFqEKzbm0Zu/BnkTNl3WyuNrXcX9e7QShUZn/6raCpWIa v54G9Ev+pTp4W8ooW3RKtNAN4h5R642+MdzxLyjJ79Oc89QOmMn/WTLrlEklZ4xGI+Cp N7uEn4gNfEgzyIlpRLboPyGxQR5Var13eBJCl0knQGgmJcX5xgx1xnjYMAfL0K3aHnx6 689dtSjjcRkFV5+59hFanpi91k5yAWM8rxgOOKzgNILifknyzScRrcnvo63AMvTqcNIs bGY5sTFTfTVJ6lw56Uqs+e+n5IgLMRi7uroG9NnEdPqaZnzyu7w7VqaUeHFXg01wWSYh 3LmA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=VrgQGtZiMF4Nacr21ZXiB9fK/bilSo1PRK2RMj77CuA=; b=kUx53+fAt4ginHsRP0sjNzt1BFKO1wmaHzkkugwNtbjzo0OTMqQyR4FCnta0jaVA/I j7TeezEPX6mSUZQBHjLv22Dayt5VpIvOThwDppDlLtwDp52AE5yP9mwjviPCNJtEL5jg GwkcNxoC4crA1WSlwfykvSL7NsstGRQ0mfabim9U33ACoXRNWvE7RG9tdLjU4Cq6vriI lAn6q1WaEFxg90A1G8AxrsYmyrtjcD21WLy3y2zHdVVELYkJmXazcCuSoqzVhvY2lZlV jm+466ftkHb14Q4py+dIGSj3Y8MCKukV8lA1quTmTDWzr8Crz9BROKsxrrG8zXQOufek 0KcA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytctGh2Hptpw8YW5tGFNgnwZGTUEP9wIzSNtWA6p1FXC4JRyXqi+ FQrsqyR8ZlHxVBT66PUGGSIPr1V/eamLuuyN+ls0FiL+ X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBovlkJD+NLQPp8WyQbxQHLTsA5rP+cjJxnoR+lr0prxaG9h9FuFz69QjPjpJ6DDsf1nDYUvUMgkbq4hM7FBaemU= X-Received: by 10.46.83.74 with SMTP id t10mr15122936ljd.127.1515784079671; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:07:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.157.15 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:07:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jim Apple Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:07:18 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Impala 3.x (and 2.x) To: "dev@impala" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Which gerrit branch were you thinking most patches would go to? If they go to 3.0, then push_to_asf.py would have to be amended to push to gerrit, bypassing code review. I think that's possible, but I'm not 100%. There is also security to think about, since the push_to_asf.py users can push a few commits at a time, including ones they didn't author or review. We'll also want to clarify https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IMPALA/How+to+Release and keep it consistent with the git & gerrit statuses quo. On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:52 AM, Philip Zeyliger wrote: > Hi! > >> Should we start tagging all candidates with a common label, e.g. > include-in-v3? > > I agree with Lars's suggestion for tagging JIRAs with include-in-v3. I've > done so, and the relevant query is > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D%20include-in-v3%20and%20project%3Dimpala > . > >> What sort of process were you thinking of for the automation? > > I think amending push_to_asf.py, as you suggest, is a great idea. I think > we have a string ("not for 2.x") which can be used in commit messages to > discourage the cherrypick for the changes we want to be exclusive until we > want to change the defaults in the other direction. (I.e., right now the > string is "not for 2.x", but at some point the string may be "should be > cherrypicked to 2.x".) > > I do think that we want to create a gerrit branch to allow 2.x-only changes > to be reviewed in the straight-forward fashion. > > -- Philip > > > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Jim Apple wrote: > >> I'm on-board with all of this. (I also would be OK delaying 3.0, if >> that were the consensus). >> >> There is one issue in here I think we should dive into: >> >> > Both master and 2.x would be active, and, at least for the beginning, >> > changes would automatically be pulled into the 2.x line, unless >> explicitly >> > blacklisted. >> >> What sort of process were you thinking of for the automation? >> >> Some context, starting from what we all likely already know: >> >> The bulk of the code review and pre-merge testing results are recorded >> in gerrit. Once the pre-merge testing passes, a patch is cherry-picked >> to the git repo hosted with gerrit. To get the patch to the Impala git >> repo hosted by the ASF, bin/push_to_asf.py is run by a human who >> supplies his or her ASF credentials. That script copies the commit to >> the ASF git repo. >> >> Often, 2-3 commits will pile up in gerrit before some committer runs >> that script and pushes them to ASF. >> >> We could edit that script (bin/push_to_asf.py) to help with the cherry >> picks, so that each time a commit is made, the committer must say >> whether the commit goes in 2.x, 3.0, or both, but the commits are >> often made by people who didn't author the patches, so they may not be >> sure which branch to go in. >> >> Additionally, gerrit code review is intimately tied to the git repo. >> Gerrit runs a git repo under-the-hood, and I believe that the branch >> on gerrit's git that changes are cherry-picked to after pre-merge >> testing is identical to the Impala git repo hosted by the ASF - down >> to the hashes, even. If we think 2.x and 3.0 will diverge enough that >> we'll want different code reviews for different branches, then we >> might want two different branches on gerrit, too. >>