Thanks Greg, I agree with everything you said. I see the same with my current client: They are afraid of any Ambari upgrade they have to do because of old and new bugs.
Either way I hope to get some feedback from contributors/committers on this. On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Greg Hill <[email protected]> wrote: > I mostly agree with what you're saying. I definitely don't want to kill > the velocity in Ambari, but it's impossible to keep up with the deluge of > JIRAs that get opened and fixed in each point release. 2.1.2 had 377 > JIRAs marked as Fixed, 2.2.0 has 719 (639 of those were marked as bugs). > Is Ambari just that buggy? Are the tests that insufficient? It seems > like we should maybe take a step back as a community and address the > problems that result in 639 bug fixes in a point release. That's > exceedingly high for a project of this size and scope. Maybe the velocity > of changes is creating more bugs than it's fixing? Are code reviews not > giving sufficient scrutiny to new contributions? Are there major > architectural problems that make bugs so common? I hope some of the core > developers on the project will chime in with their thoughts on how to move > things in a better direction, because frankly upgrading to 2.2.0 scares > me. We're on 2.1.1 and have worked around most of the bugs we've run > into. I don't want to find out what new bugs were created by the 1100 > JIRAs that have been closed in the meantime. > > I don't mean to call anyone out here. I just want to see things get > better. A new release of Ambari should be seamless. It shouldn't cause > panic. How can we fix it and how can we get the community involved in > making it better? As I say this I realize that I haven't contributed as > much as I've meant to. I'll work on fixing that. > > Greg > > On 12/9/15, 9:07 AM, "Lars Francke" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >sorry for yet another mail from a newcomer to the project. There's been a > >huge discussion (across a couple of threads actually) on the Incubator > >mailing list recently. It started with the "Concerning Sentry" thread[0]. > > > >The issue being discussed in that thread is that some feel that > >discussions > >and development actually happen outside of Apache and out of sight of > >other > >contributors. Having looked at Ambari for two days now I get a very > >similar > >feeling here and I would ask and urge you to look at your practices. > > > >Just to give some examples these tickets have been created, reviewed and > >resolved within the last three hours (most within minutes): AMBARI-14290, > >AMBARI-14288, AMBARI-14289. > > > >Two major and one critical issue. In my opinion waiting for at least 24 or > >48 hours before committing a patch would be good practice as would > >attaching a patch file to the issue itself as mentioned in my previous > >mail. Otherwise no potential contributor even has a chance to intervene or > >give feedback. > > > >Thanks for considering. > > > >Cheers, > >Lars > >[0] < > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general/52126/focus=52 > >351 > >> > > > >PS: I sent this mail earlier from the wrong account but I don't think it > >ever made it to the mailing list, if it did please excuse the double post > >
