I just wanted to know if we have achieved some consensus about this, I just
saw this PR that reminded me about this discussion.
https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1829​

It is important that we mention the existing profiles (and the intended
checks) in the contribution guide (e.g. -Prelease (or -Pall-checks triggers
these validations).

I can add this to the guide if you like once we define the checks per
stage/profile.

Ismaël


On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Aviem Zur <aviem...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with Dan and Lukasz.
> Developers should not be expected to know beforehand which specific
> profiles to run.
> The phase specified in the PR instructions (`verify`) should run all the
> relevant verifications and be the "slower" build, while a preceding
> lifecycle, such as `test`, should run the "faster" verifications.
>
> Aviem.
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 7:57 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com.invalid
> >
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:49 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > I also usually prefer "mvn verify" to to the expected thing but I see
> > that
> > > quick iteration times are key.
> >
> > I see
> > https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/
> introduction-to-the-lifecycle.html
> >
> >     verify - run any checks on results of integration tests to ensure
> > quality criteria are met
> >
> > Of course our integration tests are long enough that we shouldn't be
> > putting all of them here, but I too would expect checkstyle.
> >
> > Perhaps we could introduce a verify-fast or somesuch for fast (but
> > lower coverage) turnaround time. I would expect "mvn verify test" to
> > pass before submitting a PR, and would want to run that before asking
> > others to look at it. I think this should be our criteria (i.e. what
> > will a new but maven-savvy user run before pushing their code).
> >
> > > As long as the pre-commit hooks still check everything I'm ok with
> making
> > > the default a little more lightweight.
> >
> > The fact that our pre-commit hooks take a long time to run does change
> > things. Nothing more annoying than seeing that your PR failed 3 hours
> > later because you had some trailing whitespace...
> >
> > > On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 at 21:49 Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com.invalid>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I was hoping that the default mvn verify would be the slow build and a
> > >> profile could be enabled that would skip checks to make things faster
> > for
> > >> regular contributors. This way a person doesn't need to have detailed
> > >> knowledge of all our profiles and what they do (typically mvn verify)
> > will
> > >> do the right thing most of the time.
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Dan Halperin
> > <dhalp...@google.com.invalid>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Jesse Anderson <
> je...@smokinghand.com
> > >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > @dan are you saying that mvn verify isn't doing checkstyle
> anymore?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > `mvn verify` alone should not be running checkstyle, if modules are
> > >> > configured correctly.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > > Some of
> > >> > > the checkstyles are still running for a few modules. Also, the
> > >> > contribution
> > >> > > docs will need to change.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Yes. The PR includes discussion of these other needed changes,
> > >> > unfortunately one PR can't change two repositories.
> > >> >
> > >> > Please continue the discussion on the PR, then I will summarize it
> > back
> > >> > into the dev thread.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > Dan
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > > They say to run mvn verify before commits.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:25 AM Dan Halperin
> > >> <dhalp...@google.com.invalid
> > >> > >
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Several folks seem to have been confused after BEAM-246, where
> we
> > >> moved
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > "slow things" into the release profile. I've started a
> discussion
> > >> with
> > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1740 to see if there are
> > things
> > >> we
> > >> > > can
> > >> > > > do to fill these gaps.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Would love folks to chime in with opinions.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Dan
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jesse Anderson <
> > >> je...@smokinghand.com>
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > @Eugene, yes that failed on the checkstyle.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:27 PM Eugene Kirpichov
> > >> > > > > <kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Try just -Prelease.
> > >> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:21 PM Jesse Anderson <
> > >> > je...@smokinghand.com
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Fails because I don't have a secret key.
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:03 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > >> > > j...@nanthrax.net
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Hi Jesse,
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Could you try the same with:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > mvn verify -Prelease,apache-release
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > ?
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Regards
> > >> > > > > > > > JB
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > On 01/04/2017 09:53 PM, Jesse Anderson wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > > For some reason, running "mvn verify" isn't running
> > >> > checkstyle
> > >> > > on
> > >> > > > > > > > > everything. I had checkstyle errors in
> > beam-sdks-java-core
> > >> > that
> > >> > > > > > weren't
> > >> > > > > > > > > being found.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > I thought this was due to the extra parameters. I
> reran
> > >> with
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > > plain
> > >> > > > > > > > "mvn
> > >> > > > > > > > > verify" and it still didn't find them. From the
> output,
> > it
> > >> > > > doesn't
> > >> > > > > > look
> > >> > > > > > > > > like they're being run at all.
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > Jesse
> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > >> > > > > > > > jbono...@apache.org
> > >> > > > > > > > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > >> > > > > > > > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
>

Reply via email to