Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-yetus-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-yetus-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B33C81811F for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 22:19:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 91691 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 2016 22:19:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-yetus-dev-archive@yetus.apache.org Received: (qmail 91644 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 2016 22:19:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@yetus.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@yetus.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@yetus.apache.org Received: (qmail 91631 invoked by uid 99); 2 Mar 2016 22:19:13 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 22:19:13 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id EE054C086C for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 22:19:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.879 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.879 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2, 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: spamd4-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I_fipgumKtjW for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f175.google.com (mail-yw0-f175.google.com [209.85.161.175]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 84E5A5F396 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f175.google.com with SMTP id g127so2980017ywf.2 for ; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 14:19:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0qPLb3BBKUraVuT5JILdF+/PmuL4uAYB80udagvy99s=; b=q6xKHY9+m6vfMF1NFsNt0EY1L8bDvKwFVHdhV/xlPgYTusRXgZExTUe6w+Jyv/8qeZ ARibPdLQnzJvJQzKMYx8ATkbehKFFDbHK7QHON9EiFdDPWdSq4xXa5OrwvbJWPgXwOsM SfSvZ6nXestM1X4fsU5gEV1WP6SG9bIaaidktfo4ErOJKL41qQtDNMBzmL+iouQhH5rR VnoClfsXIdDAEH0pYrWdVrqXFmFBNM3fhnLG3P2J1UfSF/1gL86735f18/+YZxC5F29p kjc+kV4XlsFt+8it5mjly/7MGA2fiRKyYmZlxcsZoROxm1imBApVFcvG5o3gZxM6TQyC 1uog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0qPLb3BBKUraVuT5JILdF+/PmuL4uAYB80udagvy99s=; b=Pu5sXRrPELNC63eF2bHHwbObzAdxnvn5xiXFw528MC3R0J0w22D5tb/1alr+zvhVcK XwgC1620GpKHxeWUlLMqZJHCHnGYr87MX5FYebhIKcCdbuQhcs/DNogchkOdCYnQFMcm a3AisyR0N0H80PqHqHRC60+WpxmTWVxYt6xtEYc738a/kOAwclMIeTxIKN4x+JNUKLfa 2l21gJMkjxYoiNzj643O4qNk9VLERD3CFxP+UrZR/kuB4tNTctkfKr0nPzUH/1rR/TiC MG2fbMJrjB9axYYIVqRqKd82SNlp7qzJgj4314z1I90U/OGrbzQBrxt/QiQVG3Li3FRf TwbA== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJdTsNBytY4AQOGJ2bn7rAe85CbdQeYkm4IZDQAwUEnWp6jyHBeJjK0Js3JialHWUAAQIJ3tTERW1hApA== X-Received: by 10.13.219.133 with SMTP id d127mr16127330ywe.73.1456957143684; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 14:19:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.217.83 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 14:18:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Enis_S=C3=B6ztutar?= Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 14:18:44 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: /bin/ls permission issue on precommit tests To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" Cc: dev@yetus.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114fc102009b75052d184532 --001a114fc102009b75052d184532 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have seen it in a couple of places: HBASE-15325, HBASE-15375, HBASE-15181, HBASE-14949. I had checked the hosts before, I remember H0 and ubuntu-4 as hosts, but I assumed that this is not host specific, thus did not do the exclude. Let's do turn off the docker mode if you think that it will solve the issue. I really just want to unblock precommit builds. Enis On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > How often is the problem happening? I hadn't seen it come up prior to > this thread. > > What about just turning off docker mode? > > What about seeing if this is only happening on a single host and just > blacklisting that host until the release? > > -Sean > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Enis S=C3=B6ztutar w= rote: > > Let me do another proposal (for the HBase community) > > > > Let's set USE_YETUS_PRERELEASE in the HBase precommit job for now until > > 0.2.0 release. Once the release is out, we can switch it back to using > > 0.2.0 and depend on 0.2.0 until 0.3.0. > > > > How does this sound? > > > > Enis > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Enis S=C3=B6ztutar > wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Sean Busbey > >> wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Enis S=C3=B6ztutar > wrote: > >>> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Sean Busbey > wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Such a tag would be a distribution according to ASF rules. The Yet= us > >>> >> PMC would have to vote on it just as we do releases. > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > Not necessarily. We can depend on a pre-release tag of any of our > >>> > dependencies as long as we are not releasing them with our release. > We > >>> are > >>> > not releasing yetus together with HBase. We can depend on any > snapshot > >>> tag > >>> > for our precommit build. I was suggesting that the yetus community > have > >>> a > >>> > guideline on what commit has is the best. > >>> > > >>> > >>> It would be a distribution for _the_Yetus_PMC_. HBase is free to do a= s > >>> it pleases, you are correct, but ASF rules about use from those > outside of > >>> dev@yetus is clear: If the Yetus PMC is aware of regular use of our > >>> project in > >>> non-released form we need to take action to stop it. > >> > >> > >>> I *really*, *really* would like to avoid going down the rabbit hole o= f > >>> ASF rules lawyering on "who's using the artifact" and other ways of > >>> attempting > >>> to use semantics to avoid the root cause of yetus needing to release > more > >>> often. > >>> That will be exhausting, a waste of time that could instead be put > towards > >>> actually having releases, and will doom the Yetus project to fail in > >>> its expressed purpose of making software for the public good (rather > than > >>> for > >>> ASF internal belly-itching). > >>> > >> > >> ASF internal projects are the immediate consumer of yetus today and we > >> depend on it in a critical manner in the development lifecycle. That i= s > why > >> prioritizing ASF internal needs for YETUS makes sense to me. Given > enough > >> time, and if yetus community keeps up with frequent releases and more > >> stability we would not need to depend on unreleased tags. But if HBase > and > >> Hadoop and other projects are blocked for precommit until a release > which > >> may be another week or so, I would rather go with a solution that fixe= s > the > >> issue now and worry about the perfect solution later. > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> >> > >>> >> The answer to the issue of blocking downstream folks is to release > more > >>> >> often. > >>> >> > >>> >> The Yetus PMC has a release cadence goal of weekly. Other projects > >>> >> that want access to more frequent releases can help the situation = by > >>> >> helping to vote on releases. > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > This is great, but I did not see it happen yet. Again, my main goal > is > >>> to > >>> > unblock current state with the least amount of friction. > >>> > > >>> > >>> As I mentioned, the best way to unblock the current state is to help > >>> vote on releases. > >>> > >>> Another way to help would be to be more vocal on prioritization for > >>> things going into a release. For example, we have the 0.2.0 vote > closing > >>> this coming Friday rather than the prior Monday because the Yetus > >>> community prioritized fixing a few last sharp edges over > >>> the weekend. More voices that state the pressing need for blocking > >>> issues will help the community make calls that are in line with what > you > >>> desire. > >>> > >>> FWIW, I had no visibility that HBase was hitting YETUS-285 and so I > >>> had no reason to push for a sooner release with my HBase hat on. > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Sean > >>> > >> > >> > --001a114fc102009b75052d184532--