What do we need to do to get an instance that we *would* be willing to rely on as the PMC? We could file an INFRA ticket for a VM we handle ourselves and then run a CI solution apart from the primary ASF jenkins infra.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > That's just it... I don't want to encourage a dependence on it. It provides > some utility, yes, but I don't want to cross over into the area of it being > formally relied upon by the Accumulo PMC... because that raises the > concerns which my previous disclaimer email was supposed to alleviate. > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 5:50 PM Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > >> But, at the same time, if we're going to be using this as a reliable >> means for whether or not our tests are passing (which I would expect all >> developers to be doing), it should be written down like we do for other >> developer-related knowledge. >> >> I don't see why we can't present it with the caveats you state. It feels >> like we're starting a boys-club if we have something we're going to rely >> upon for development that we don't tell anyone about... >> >> Christopher wrote: >> > Given its "non-official" status (with respect to its affiliation with the >> > Foundation and PMC), I'd prefer not to formally list it on the website. >> > That might imply some long-term persistence and/or guarantees about >> > availability to the community, and I cannot offer such guarantees. >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:57 PM Josh Elser<[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Bueno. Makes sense to me and avoids future issues with that lengthy >> >> disclaimer you sent previously :) >> >> >> >> Maybe have something on the website for contributors/new-devs to find >> >> out about too? >> >> >> >> Christopher wrote: >> >>> Well, it's already self-service, for those I've added. For anybody >> else, >> >> I >> >>> can add you if you send me your GitHub username. Then, you'll just have >> >> to >> >>> accept my invitation to the revelc organization on GitHub, and you'll >> be >> >>> able to log in and add yourself to the post-build notifications. >> >>> >> >>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 2:48 PM Josh Elser<[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Yeah, that's a decent intermediate step. Getting an email is pretty >> much >> >>>> the only thing that's going to force me to pay attention. >> >>>> >> >>>> Making it self-service would be an even bigger plus, but I'm OK >> waiting >> >>>> for "Christopher response time" :) >> >>>> >> >>>> Michael Wall wrote: >> >>>>> I am good with that option Christopher. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Christopher<[email protected]> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>>>> The other option is that if people really want to subscribe to >> >>>>>> notifications, I can just add their email to the post-build >> >> notification >> >>>>>> email list directly. Since I'm willing to grant access to Accumulo >> >>>>>> developers already, they can also just add themselves by editing the >> >>>>>> existing jobs. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> RIght now, I'm thinking: add yourself (or I can add you) to the >> >>>> post-build >> >>>>>> notification, or use the RSS, is the best option. No dev@ list, no >> >>>>>> notifications@ list. It's just too much trouble. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 2:28 PM Keith Turner<[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>> Personally I am not in favor of automated things sending stuff to >> the >> >>>> dev >> >>>>>>> list. I like the dev just being discussion among humans. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Dylan Hutchison< >> >>>>>>> [email protected] >> >>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> On the other hand, sending failed build notifications to the dev >> >> list >> >>>>>>>> motivates us to not break the tests and make the tests stable. >> I'll >> >>>>>>> leave >> >>>>>>>> it to your decision Chris, unless others have an opinion. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Christopher<[email protected]> >> >>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:02 PM Dylan Hutchison< >> >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Christopher< >> [email protected]> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>> Okay, so after some investigation ( >> >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-12252), it appears >> >>>>>>> that >> >>>>>>>>>>> notifications@ is simply configured to block email from non >> >>>>>> apache >> >>>>>>>>>>> addresses. >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> So, I have three possible solutions, if the Accumulo devs wish >> to >> >>>>>>>>> receive >> >>>>>>>>>>> build notifications from my instance of Jenkins: >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> 1. I use my personal ASF creds on Jenkins to send build >> >>>>>>> notifications >> >>>>>>>>> as >> >>>>>>>>>>> myself. >> >>>>>>>>>>> 2. The Accumulo project request the configuration of >> >>>>>> notifications@ >> >>>>>>>> to >> >>>>>>>>>> be >> >>>>>>>>>>> changed to allow non-apache addresses. >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> #2 sounds ideal to me, if possible. Sending build emails to dev >> >>>>>>> would >> >>>>>>>>>> drive some people to un-subscribe. On the other hand, people >> that >> >>>>>>> sign >> >>>>>>>>> up >> >>>>>>>>>> for notifications@ are asking for it. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> My reason for being reluctant to pick #2 as my preference was >> that >> >> I >> >>>>>>>> don't >> >>>>>>>>> know what additional burden that might place on the moderators. >> >> Plus, >> >>>>>>>> INFRA >> >>>>>>>>> (or, at least Gavin, on that ticket and in HipChat when I thanked >> >> him >> >>>>>>> for >> >>>>>>>>> clarifying) seemed pretty satisfied with the existing conventions >> >> of >> >>>>>>>> being >> >>>>>>>>> @ >> >>>>>>>>> apache.org only. I'd prefer to conform to Foundation-wide >> >>>>>> conventions >> >>>>>>>> when >> >>>>>>>>> it comes to infra stuffs, whenever possible. I know how much work >> >> it >> >>>>>> is >> >>>>>>>> on >> >>>>>>>>> INFRA to constantly ask them for special requests which diverge >> >> from >> >>>>>>> the >> >>>>>>>>> norm, especially when they are managing so much already. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Breaking conventions within our community like #3 posed would be >> >>>>>>>> preferable >> >>>>>>>>> to me, rather than breaking Foundation-wide infra conventions. >> But, >> >>>>>>>> you're >> >>>>>>>>> right that it could annoy subscribers. If I remember correctly, >> >>>>>> Commons >> >>>>>>>> is >> >>>>>>>>> one community which does this, sending build notifications to >> their >> >>>>>> dev >> >>>>>>>>> list. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Another option is a new email list. It doesn't even have to be >> >>>>>>>>>> ASF-affiliated. It could be some list you personally create >> that >> >>>>>>> many >> >>>>>>>>>> Accumulo devs personally decide to sign up for. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> That's possible. I could set up a list specifically associated >> with >> >>>>>>> that >> >>>>>>>>> Jenkins server. It already has an RSS feed, which might be >> better, >> >>>>>>>> though, >> >>>>>>>>> if people want to subscribe to builds that way. The main purpose >> of >> >>>>>> me >> >>>>>>>>> setting it up was to provide direct feedback to this community, >> >>>>>> though, >> >>>>>>>>> rather than force folks to go seek out that feedback. If the RSS >> >> feed >> >>>>>>> is >> >>>>>>>>> sufficient for people, then that would save me some trouble, >> >>>>>> though... >> >>>>>>>> it's >> >>>>>>>>> certainly the easiest thing to do (nothing). >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Plus, it is also putting notifications in IRC. So maybe, RSS+IRC >> is >> >>>>>>> more >> >>>>>>>>> than enough. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 3. I configure Jenkins to post to the dev list (if possible). >> >>>>>>>>>>> My preference in order is #3, then #2, then #1 last. >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> -- busbey
