I'll follow up with them and shoot an email over to see if we can use circle with gitbox repos.
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:47 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > Does someone want to ask Infra about it? I haven't asked them since we > migrated to GitBox > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Uwe L. Korn <uw...@xhochy.com> wrote: > > CircleCI requires more permissions than Travis and Apache Infra don't > want to give it to them. This might be different now that we have the > gitbox setup instead of the previous Apache git mirroring. > > > >> Am 01.02.2018 um 20:08 schrieb Phillip Cloud <cpcl...@gmail.com>: > >> > >> What is the main barrier to getting CircleCI to work with Apache > projects? > >> > >>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:03 PM Uwe L. Korn <uw...@xhochy.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I just went over a lot of open PRs and sadly I wasn't able to reduce > the > >>> number of open ones significantly. Some of them make slow progress and > it > >>> might be worthwhile to jump in in a week, for now I would rather wait > and > >>> let the initial authors finish them to get more involved in the > project. > >>> Currently the CI issues are a main bottleneck for all of us, besides > the > >>> long-running Python tests, we also spent a lot of time on the > environment > >>> setup. Typically this is a thing that can really be improved with a > docker > >>> setup, sadly Travis takes quite some time to pull the current image we > use > >>> for the manylinux1 build. I'll first have a look at improving it and > if the > >>> download times get better, we might want to move some things in there > >>> (sadly CircleCI and Apache projects still don't work together). > >>> > >>> Also I think a confusing thing is that we have separate documentations > >>> between Python and C++. This is also a thing I'm going to work on once > I > >>> have some time. The two implementation are bound very thight together > and a > >>> lot that applies to one language also applies to the other one. > >>> > >>> Uwe > >>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018, at 6:09 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: > >>>> hi folks, > >>>> > >>>> We've had a rough couple of weeks in our PR queue due to various CI > >>>> issues causing a high incidence of build failures: > >>>> > >>>> * Package dependency upgrades (Thrift -- this has been fixed) > >>>> * Failures due possibly to VM setting changes in Travis CI (memory > >>>> thrashing / VM timeouts, see ARROW-2062, ARROW-2071) > >>>> * apt flakiness (this is still ongoing, see ARROW-2021) > >>>> > >>>> Meanwhile, at the moment, we have 37 open PRs > >>>> (https://github.com/apache/arrow/pulls). Some of these are stale and > >>>> need to either be reviewed, updated, or closed. We have many other PRs > >>>> that need to be rebased (builds should mostly pass now if rebased on > >>>> master) and/or reviewed. I've been doing the best I can do keep up > >>>> with the PR queue (and others have been reviewing and merging PRs, > >>>> too), but it's currently not enough to keep up, and there's a lot of > >>>> development work for the 0.9.0 milestone that I'd like to also be > >>>> doing. > >>>> > >>>> The project is growing fast -- both in users and new developers. Just > >>>> on a single install path for the Python libraries, Arrow is being > >>>> installed _over 1000 times per day_ > >>>> (https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/pyarrow) -- when you add up all the > >>>> install paths it is likely to be much more than that. > >>>> > >>>> Reviews and help maintaining PRs from the community, but especially > >>>> from other committers and PMC members, would be especially useful > >>>> right now to get the project operating smoothly with a steady stream > >>>> of high quality patches making their way into master. > >>>> > >>>> If there's anything else we can do to improve developer and community > >>>> productivity in Arrow right now, I'm open to ideas. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Wes > >>> > > >
