systemml-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Glenn Weidner" <gweid...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: Build passed/failed messages for pull requests
Date Fri, 28 Apr 2017 19:40:06 GMT

My preference is option 3.

Thanks,
Glenn




From:	Arvind Surve <acs_s@yahoo.com.INVALID>
To:	"dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org"
            <dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
Date:	04/28/2017 11:09 AM
Subject:	Re: Build passed/failed messages for pull requests



Agree, these messages are distractions.
 Arvind Surve | Spark Technology Center  | http://www.spark.tc/

      From: Matthias Boehm <mboehm7@googlemail.com>
 To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
 Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 11:05 AM
 Subject: Re: Build passed/failed messages for pull requests

as I commented on one of these github comments, I'm strongly against
these kind of unnecessary messages because they distract from the actual
discussions. I already had to change my notification settings
accordingly - essentially I'm not watching SystemML's PR activity any
more.

Regards,
Matthias

On 4/28/2017 10:42 AM, Deron Eriksson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When a pull request is created or another commit is pushed to that pull
> request, a build including running our test suite is performed (Jenkins
at
> https://sparktc.ibmcloud.com/jenkins/job/SystemML-PullRequestBuilder/).
> This is the same model that other projects such as Apache Spark use
> (Jenkins at
> https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/).
>
> A few days ago, automated build passed/failed pull request messages were
> introduced to our pull requests, following the same type of Spark model.
> A) SystemML example:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-systemml/pull/442
> B) Spark example: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17765
>
> Personally I like these messages because for contributors that do pull
> requests, it automatically tells them the status of the build for their
> pull requests and gives them a direct link to the build/test results. An
> opposing viewpoint would be that these messages are somewhat like spam.
>
> So we should make a public decision on the mailing list what to do about
> these automated build status messages.
>
> Some options:
> (1) keep the automated messages exactly as they are
> (2) keep the automated messages, but consolidate the two messages into
one
> (such as "Build successful" and "Refer to this link...").
> (3) get rid of the automated messages
>
> I like (2). Any other opinions or options?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Deron
>
>





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