+1

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Dan Halperin <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Here is my summary of the threads:
>
> Overwhelming agreement:
>
> - rename `release` to something more appropriate.
> - add `checkstyle` to the default build (it's basically a compile error)
> - add more information to contributor guide
>
> Reasonable agreement
>
> - don't update the github instructions to make passing `mvn verify -P<all
> checks>` mandatory. Maybe add a hint that this is a good proxy for what
> Jenkins will run.
>
> Unresolved:
>
> - whether all checks should be in `mvn verify`
> - whether `mvn test` is useful for most workflows
>
> I'll propose to proceed with the overwhelmingly agreed-upon changes, and as
> we see increasingly many new contributors re-evaluate the remaining issues.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 to at least update the contribution guide and improve the profile
> name.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >
> > On 01/24/2017 09:49 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> >
> >> My impression is that we don't have consensus on whether all checks or
> >> minimal checks should be the default, or whether we can have both via
> `mvn
> >> test` and `mvn verify`.
> >>
> >> But that doesn't prevent us from giving -P release a better name and
> >> mentioning it in the dev guide and in some manner in our PR template.
> >>
> >> Right now we are living with the combination of the bad aspects -
> default
> >> is not thorough but not actually fast and a thorough check is
> >> undocumented.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Ismaël Mejía <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> 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 <[email protected]> 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
> >>>>
> >>> <[email protected]
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:49 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]
> >
> >>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> <[email protected]>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Jesse Anderson <
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> <[email protected]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 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 <
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> @Eugene, yes that failed on the checkstyle.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:27 PM Eugene Kirpichov
> >>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Try just -Prelease.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:21 PM Jesse Anderson <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Fails because I don't have a secret key.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:03 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > [email protected]
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>



-- 
-------
Jason Kuster
Apache Beam (Incubating) / Google Cloud Dataflow

Reply via email to