+1 on merge then sorting out the mess. I want to include this stuff in alpha 4.
Thanks, S On Oct 20, 2017 01:18, "OpenInx" <[email protected]> wrote: > Fine, I opened jira HBASE-19057 for it. > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Anoop John <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 for opening an issue and handle the merge as part of that. > > I did a review of the new classes for the FilterList impl.. Great > > cleanup work. Very easy to read and understand the code now.. > > Have few comments specially on FilterListWithOR. If u can raise a > > merge issue, can comment down that. If needed can open up subtasks > > can then handle. > > > > -Anoop- > > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 12:01 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > Open a issue to track the merging work? Let's do a rebase and more > > testing > > > in that issue. And then come back and open a vote. > > > > > > 2017-10-20 11:48 GMT+08:00 OpenInx <[email protected]>: > > > > > >> > I believe there are several UTs which we want them to be the guard > of > > >> merging? > > >> What is the situation of these UTs? > > >> > > >> The UT is TestFilterListOnMini which make sure the filter list with > > family > > >> filter in it works fine, it's enable in branch HBASE-18410 now . see > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18977. > > >> > > >> > Some of recent patches, such as HBASE-18368-HBASE-18410.v2.patch, > > >> didn't get > > >> proper QA run > > >> > > >> All of the UT passed except one failed case , and this failed case is > > >> unrelated. see > > >> https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9157/testReport/ > > >> > > >> > This is a incompatible change for filter developer ? > > >> > > >> Yes, I think so. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Guanghao Zhang <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > HBASE-18368-HBASE-18410.v2.patch got a proper QA > > >> > run: PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9157. And the failed ut is not related. > So > > I > > >> > committed it to branch HBASE-18410... > > >> > HBASE-18368 changed the javadoc of NEXT_ROW. This is a incompatible > > >> change > > >> > for filter developer? > > >> > > > >> > 2017-10-20 9:14 GMT+08:00 Ted Yu <[email protected]>: > > >> > > > >> > > Some of recent patches, such as HBASE-18368-HBASE-18410.v2.patch, > > >> didn't > > >> > > get proper QA run (due to precommit disruption). > > >> > > > > >> > > We'd better get several good QA runs. > > >> > > > > >> > > Cheers > > >> > > > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 5:38 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > [email protected]> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > I believe there are several UTs which we want them to be the > > guard of > > >> > > > merging? What is the situation of these UTs? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Thanks. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 2017-10-20 8:33 GMT+08:00 OpenInx <[email protected]>: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Hi All : > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > All subtasks have been resolved except HBASE-18993 > > >> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18993>, I think > > it's > > >> > time > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > merge HBASE-18410 <https://issues.apache.org/ > > >> jira/browse/HBASE-18410 > > >> > > > > >> > > > > branch > > >> > > > > to master now. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Any concerns ? > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> ============================== > > >> Openinx blog : http://openinx.github.io > > >> > > >> TO BE A GREAT HACKER ! > > >> ============================== > > >> > > > > > > -- > ============================== > Openinx blog : http://openinx.github.io > > TO BE A GREAT HACKER ! > ============================== >
