mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gautam <gautamn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Protected master needs to be turned off
Date Thu, 30 Nov 2017 19:34:37 GMT
I believe few of the committers voted -1 and those who favored they have
put  pre-condition.
As mentioned before and mentioning again without protected master it will
be hard to debug the build failure.
And I am sure everyone here is aware of the challenges which CI faces every
day, not having protected master makes it more difficult.

-Gautam








On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Eric Xie <jxie@apache.org> wrote:

> Since committers voted for +1. We consider this vote passed.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-19 12:51, "Eric Xie"<jxie@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I'm starting this thread to vote on turning off protected master. The
> reasons are:
> >
> > 1. Since we turned on protected master pending PRs has grown from 40 to
> 80. It is severely slowing down development.
> >
> > 2. Committers, not CI, are ultimately responsible for the code they
> merge. You should only override the CI when you are very confident that CI
> is the problem, not your code. If it turns out you are wrong, you should
> fix it ASAP. This is the bare minimum requirement for all committers: BE
> RESPONSIBLE.
> >
> > I'm aware of the argument for using protected master: It make sure that
> master is stable.
> >
> > Well, master will be most stable if we stop adding any commits to it.
> But that's not what we want is it?
> >
> > Protected master hardly adds any stability. The faulty tests that breaks
> master at random got merged into master because they happened to succeed
> once.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Junyuan Xie
> >
>



-- 
Best Regards,
Gautam Kumar

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message