Stack, as things stand, Ted Yu has a patch that is a backport of MOB. He told me offline he has taken a look at the jiras that went in in the master that is to do with MOB, and got them in the backport. Now, to your point, I agree that someone familiar with MOB code should do the backport but the question is, is that dev available to do it now? The next best thing is to get Ted Yu's patch reviewed by someone familiar with the feature. I really hope that we can get cycles from the original MOB devs on this.
Agree that we shouldn't be adding flaky tests. The question is if the failures on master to do with MOB are really MOB related or something else (for argument's sake, let's say, procv2).. On the point about the DISCUSS thread, yeah, it's fine to do it if folks feel it's the right way to go. ________________________________________ From: saint....@gmail.com <saint....@gmail.com> on behalf of Stack <st...@duboce.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 10:55 AM To: HBase Dev List Subject: Re: MOB in branch-1? (Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Merge branch hbase-11339 HBase MOB to trunk) (Doing another resend...) I have objection to you, Ted Yu, doing it. MOB has spread all about master branch. Backport should be done by someone who knows MOB. Higher up in this thread, Sean asks: "Can we get a [DISCUSS] flagged thread to see what, if anything, folks would like to see gate inclusion in branch-1?" Shouldn't we do this before we 'create a backport...'. For me, there should be no new flakies in branch-1. Branch-1 builds are a hard-won stable(-ish). Looking at master build, MOB seems quiet lately but going by HBASE-15012, our flakies umbrella issue, I see notes that TestMobExportSnapshot has failed a few times (that is probably because the test it derives from is flakey) and TestMobRestoreFlushSnapshotFromClient gets a mention. St.Ack On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > (Doing a resend of below... it doesn't seem to have gone through) > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If there is no objection, I will create a backport JIRA tomorrow and >> attach patch. >> >> > I have objection to you doing it. MOB has spread all about master branch. > Backport should be done by someone who knows MOB. > > Higher up in this thread, Sean asks: "Can we get a [DISCUSS] flagged > thread to see what, if anything, folks > would like to see gate inclusion in branch-1?" Shouldn't we do this > before we 'create a backport...'. > > For me, there should be no new flakies in branch-1. Branch-1 builds are a > hard-won stable(-ish). Looking at master build, MOB seems quiet lately but > going by HBASE-15012, our flakies umbrella issue, I see notes that > TestMobExportSnapshot has failed a few times (that is probably because the > test it derives from is flakey) and TestMobRestoreFlushSnapshotFromClient > gets a mention. > > St.Ack > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> If there is no objection, I will create a backport JIRA tomorrow and >>> attach patch. >>> >>> >> I have objection to you doing it. MOB has spread all about master branch. >> Backport should be done by someone who knows MOB. >> >> Higher up in this thread, Sean asks: "Can we get a [DISCUSS] flagged >> thread to see what, if anything, folks >> would like to see gate inclusion in branch-1?" Shouldn't we do this >> before we 'create a backport...'. >> >> For me, there should be no new flakies in branch-1. Branch-1 builds are a >> hard-won stable(-ish). Looking at master build, MOB seems quiet lately but >> going by HBASE-15012, our flakies umbrella issue, I see notes that >> TestMobExportSnapshot has failed a few times (that is probably because the >> test it derives from is flakey) and TestMobRestoreFlushSnapshotFromClient >> gets a mention. >> >> St.Ack >> >
