+1 to ignoring flaky test. FYI there's a fourth cherrypick: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5624
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:45 PM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> wrote: > Sent out https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5640 to ignore the flaky > test. As JB is the release manager, I'l let him make the call on what to do > about it. > Best > -P. > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:34 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: > >> I would vote for second option, not a release blocker and disable the >> test in the release branch. My reasoning is: >> - ReferenceRunner is not yet the official alternative to existing direct >> runners. >> - It is bad to have flaky tests on the release branch, and we would not >> get good signal during validation. >> >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello all, >>> cherrypicks for the release branch seem to be going well, but thanks to >>> them we were able to surface a flaky test in the release branch. JIRA is >>> filed: https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/issues/BEAM-4558 >>> >>> Given that test issue, I see the following options: >>> - Consider that this test is not a release blocker. Go ahead with RC2 >>> after cherrypicks are brought in, or >>> - Consider that this test is not a release blocker, so we disable it >>> before cutting RC2. >>> - Consider this test a release blocker, and triage the bug for fixing. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Best >>> -P. >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:54 AM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Precommits for PR https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5609 are now >>>> passing. For now I've simply set failOnWarning to false to cherrypick into >>>> the release, and fix in master later on. >>>> Best >>>> -P. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:08 AM Scott Wegner <sweg...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> From my understanding, the @SuppressFBWarnings usage is in a >>>>> dependency (ByteBuddy) rather than directly in our code; so we're not able >>>>> to modify the usage. >>>>> >>>>> Pablo, feel free to disable failOnWarning for the sdks-java-core >>>>> project temporarily. This isn't a major regression since we've only >>>>> recently made the change to enable it [1]. We can work separately on >>>>> figuring out how to resolve the warnings. >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5319 >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:57 PM Tim Robertson < >>>>> timrobertson...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Pablo, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm afraid I couldn't find one either... there is an issue about it >>>>>> [1] which is old so it doesn't look likely to be resolved either. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have time (sorry I am a bit busy) could you please verify the >>>>>> version does work if you install that version locally? I know the maven >>>>>> version of that [2] but not sure on the gradle equivalent. If we know it >>>>>> works, we can then find a repository that fits ok with Apache/Beam >>>>>> policy. >>>>>> >>>>>> Alternatively, we could consider using a fully qualified reference >>>>>> (i.e. @edu.umd.cs.findbugs.annotations.SuppressWarnings) to the >>>>>> deprecated >>>>>> version and leave the dependency at the 1.3.9-1. I believe our general >>>>>> direction is to remove findbugs when errorprone covers all aspects so I >>>>>> *expect* this should be considered reasonable. >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope this helps, >>>>>> Tim >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://github.com/stephenc/findbugs-annotations/issues/4 >>>>>> [2] >>>>>> https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-3rd-party-jars-local.html >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Tim, >>>>>>> you're right. Thanks for pointing that out. There's just one problem >>>>>>> that I'm running into now: The 3.0.1-1 version does not seem to be >>>>>>> available in Maven Central[1]. Looking at the website, I am not quite >>>>>>> sure >>>>>>> if there's another repository where they do stage the newer versions?[2] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -P >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/com/github/stephenc/findbugs/findbugs-annotations >>>>>>> / >>>>>>> [2] http://stephenc.github.io/findbugs-annotations/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:10 PM Tim Robertson < >>>>>>> timrobertson...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Pablo, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I took only a quick look. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "- The JAR from the non-LGPL findbugs does not contain the >>>>>>>> SuppressFBWarnings annotation" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unless I misunderstand you it looks like SuppressFBWarnings was >>>>>>>> added in Stephen's version in this commit [1] which was introduced >>>>>>>> in version 2.0.3-1 - I've checked is in the 3.0.1-1 build [2] >>>>>>>> I notice in your commits [1] you've been exploring version 3.0.0 >>>>>>>> already though... what happens when you use 3.0.1-1? It sounds like the >>>>>>>> wrong version is coming in rather than the annotation being missing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>> https://github.com/stephenc/findbugs-annotations/commits/master/src/main/java/edu/umd/cs/findbugs/annotations/SuppressWarnings.java >>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/stephenc/findbugs-annotations/releases >>>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5609/commits/32c7df706e970557f154ff6bc521b2e00f9d09ab >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> I'll humbly declare that after wrestling with he build to stop >>>>>>>>> depending on the wrong findbugs_annotations, I feel somewhat lost. The >>>>>>>>> issue is actually quite small: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - The JAR from the non-LGPL findbugs does not contain the >>>>>>>>> SuppressFBWarnings annotation. This means that when building, >>>>>>>>> ByteBuddy >>>>>>>>> produces a few warnings (nothing critical). >>>>>>>>> - The easiest way to avoid this failure is to call >>>>>>>>> applyJavaNature(failOnWarning: false), but this would be bad, since >>>>>>>>> we want >>>>>>>>> to keep a high standard for tasks like ErrorProne and FindBugs itself. >>>>>>>>> - So I find myself lost: How do we suppress trivial warnings >>>>>>>>> coming from missing annotations, and honor warnings coming from other >>>>>>>>> plugins? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Any help / a PR from someone more capable would be appreciated. >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> -P. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 3:02 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, ok I was not aware it was already being addressed, nice. >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:56 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Ismaël, >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > I believe Pablo's https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5609 is >>>>>>>>>> fixing the issue by changing the findbugs back to >>>>>>>>>> "com.github.stephenc.findbugs". Is this what you are referring to? >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Ahmet >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Boyuan Zhang < >>>>>>>>>> boyu...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> Hey JB, >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> I added some instructions about how to create python wheels in >>>>>>>>>> this PR: https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/467 . Hope it >>>>>>>>>> would be helpful. >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> Boyuan >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback >>>>>>>>> <https://goto.google.com/pabloem-feedback> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback >>>>>>> <https://goto.google.com/pabloem-feedback> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback >>>> <https://goto.google.com/pabloem-feedback> >>>> >>> -- >>> Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback >>> <https://goto.google.com/pabloem-feedback> >>> >> >> -- > Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback > <https://goto.google.com/pabloem-feedback> >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
