streams-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Renato Marroquín Mogrovejo <renatoj.marroq...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Documentation & Testing
Date Tue, 09 Sep 2014 16:11:15 GMT
Hi Ryan,

I think it is better to have anything established  first and then keep on
improving the process because if not, then the project will just be full of
discussions and not progress.
Thanks and I will post anything through JIRA then :-)

Renato M.
On Sep 9, 2014 4:38 PM, "Ryan Ebanks" <ryanebanks@gmail.com> wrote:

> Renato,
>
> I don't think we have really established a method for patching the website.
>  That is something that we do need to discuss though, as we should be
> generating documentation in the near term for the website. I think what you
> have proposed is great for making changes to it now.
>
> -Ryan Ebanks
>
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Renato Marroquín Mogrovejo <
> renatoj.marroquin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ryan,
> >
> > The project really needs this. But how can we propose patches for the
> > website? I remember I had some troubles in setting the project initially,
> > and found some problems with the website, and I wanted to change them,
> but
> > I didn't find an easy way of doing this other than opening a JIRA and
> > posting a patch for the specific change. If everyone is ok with than,
> then
> > I will do that for fixing some errors  :)
> >
> >
> > Renato M.
> >
> > 2014-09-03 20:52 GMT+02:00 Ryan Ebanks <ryanebanks@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Matt - Great suggestion.  We should get this all documented and added
> to
> > > the webpage with a general 'how to contribute' along with guidelines.
> > >
> > > Steve - No testing should be 'testing just for the sake of having a
> > test'.
> > >  There needs to be tests to verify that the logic in all contributed
> code
> > > is correct/works as expected.  At a minimum all public
> methods/functions
> > > should have tests.  I also agree we need a users guide written.  The
> > > documentation as a whole for this project is lacking, but I do feel
> that
> > we
> > > will drastically be improving in this area shortly.
> > >
> > > -Ryan Ebanks
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Steve Blackmon <sblackmon@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Samza has excellent developer guidelines we could use for
> inspiration:
> > > >
> > > > http://samza.incubator.apache.org/contribute/rules.html
> > > > http://samza.incubator.apache.org/contribute/coding-guide.html
> > > >
> > > > I am in favor of testing, but skeptical of testing just for the sake
> > > > of having a test.  How about someone take a shot at rules / coding
> > > > guide for streams, and we can discuss and tweak those documents until
> > > > they have sufficient support?
> > > >
> > > > P.S.
> > > >
> > > > We need to provide helpful documentation for implementers as well as
> > > > core developers.  Personally I think this more important to increase
> > > > interest and adoption.
> > > >
> > > > I've found Spark's Programming Guide well-structured and useful.
> > > >
> > > > http://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/programming-guide.html
> > > >
> > > > Steve Blackmon
> > > > sblackmon@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Matt Franklin <
> > m.ben.franklin@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On the whole, I agree.  I think it would be good to document this
> on
> > > the
> > > > > website. When we do, let's be sure to describe the best way to use
> > > GitHub
> > > > > (personal fork, etc) and what the minimum bar for UNIT testing is
> vs
> > > > > INTEGRATION tests.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Ryan Ebanks <ryanebanks@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Stanton,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I am on board with all of those suggestions.  I know it may take
> > some
> > > > time
> > > > >> to implement all of them,
> > > > >> but I agree we should start the discussion and start moving that
> > > > direction.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hopefully the suggestions I proposed are just the first of many
> > steps
> > > to
> > > > >> improving transparency
> > > > >> and quality in this project.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Ryan Ebanks
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Stanton Sievers <
> > ssievers@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Hey Ryan,
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I agree completely.  I think there a few things that can
be done
> > on
> > > > top
> > > > >> of
> > > > >> > what you've proposed that can help make the need more
> transparent.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Using maven site, we should be able to publish JavaDoc so
it is
> > > > readily
> > > > >> > available for everyone to review and consume.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Again, using maven site, we should be able to publish code
> > coverage
> > > > >> > information to make it apparent where the gaps are and where
> folks
> > > > should
> > > > >> > focus their efforts to fill the gap.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I'm not sure if there's a dedicated process for publishing
maven
> > > site
> > > > to
> > > > >> an
> > > > >> > Apache's project's site, but that would be a good place
to start
> > if
> > > it
> > > > >> > exists.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Also, at one point CloudBees offered free pull request building
> > for
> > > > open
> > > > >> > source projects on BuildHive.  This would allow a one-off
build
> to
> > > be
> > > > >> > executed and evaluated against the pull request.  If that
build
> > > > reported
> > > > >> > code coverage information, it would help a reviewer establish
> > > whether
> > > > or
> > > > >> > not the level of unit testing is adequate.  Even publishing
this
> > > > >> > information as part of our own builds on builds.a.o would
be
> > useful.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > As a community we should have the discussion about the next
> steps,
> > > but
> > > > >> I'm
> > > > >> > hoping these options can get that conversation started.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Thanks for bringing this up.
> > > > >> > -Stanton
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Ryan Ebanks <
> > ryanebanks@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > We need to do a better job of Documentation and Testing.
 Way
> > too
> > > > many
> > > > >> > pull
> > > > >> > > requests are getting approved and merged in that contain
no
> > > > >> documentation
> > > > >> > > and minimal or no testing.  This needs to stop immediately.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > I know documentation and testing is time consuming
and not
> fun,
> > > but
> > > > we
> > > > >> > > cannot push this off and hope someone will fix it the
> future.  I
> > > am
> > > > >> > > proposing the following minimal guidelines/rules for
all
> future
> > > pull
> > > > >> > > requests.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > *Documentation*
> > > > >> > >     1.) All pull requests contain adequate java docs
> > > > >> > >     2.) Java docs accurately reflect the code and are
up to
> date
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > *Testing*
> > > > >> > >     1.) Test must test more than 'does it throw an
exception'.
> > > > (Most of
> > > > >> > the
> > > > >> > > serializers unit tests do                     exactly
this)
> > > > >> > >     For newly added classes
> > > > >> > >         1.) All classes have unit tests and integration
tests
> > > (when
> > > > >> > > necessary) or it is explicitly stated in          
 the pull
> > > request
> > > > >> why
> > > > >> > > that class can't/won't be tested.
> > > > >> > >     For modifications to existing classes
> > > > >> > >         1.) Any method that you touch must have unit
tests.
> If
> > > none
> > > > >> > > currently exist you are responsible         for creating
them.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > If any of these extremely minimal requirements are
not met,
> your
> > > > pull
> > > > >> > > request will not be evaluated until it meets all of
the
> > > > requirements.
> > > > >> > > *Anyone
> > > > >> > > evaluating a pull request should verify these requirements
> > before
> > > > >> +1-ing
> > > > >> > > the request.  All apache committers should verify that
these
> > > > >> requirements
> > > > >> > > are met before merging requests too. *
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > These basic steps will drastically improve our code
base, and
> > make
> > > > it
> > > > >> > > easier for the project to gain new contributors.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Sincerely,
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Ryan Ebanks
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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