Sounds like a good way to me. By the way, the setup for the new CI is ready and we’re already verifying the master branch. We still need to do some clean up and await the Amazon-AppSec review.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Mu Li <[email protected]> wrote: > I barely remember CI caught bugs except for lint, but it definitely slows > down the code merge. > > I understand the general concerns for removing master protection. So I > propose to use the dev branch to merge changes until the CI is stable. And > make the nightly build build the dev branch instead of master. > > Best > Mu > > > On Nov 30, 2017, at 11:34 AM, Gautam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I believe few of the committers voted -1 and those who favored they have > > put pre-condition. > > As mentioned before and mentioning again without protected master it will > > be hard to debug the build failure. > > And I am sure everyone here is aware of the challenges which CI faces > every > > day, not having protected master makes it more difficult. > > > > -Gautam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Eric Xie <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Since committers voted for +1. We consider this vote passed. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Eric > >> > >> > >> > >>> On 2017-11-19 12:51, "Eric Xie"<[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> I'm starting this thread to vote on turning off protected master. The > >> reasons are: > >>> > >>> 1. Since we turned on protected master pending PRs has grown from 40 to > >> 80. It is severely slowing down development. > >>> > >>> 2. Committers, not CI, are ultimately responsible for the code they > >> merge. You should only override the CI when you are very confident that > CI > >> is the problem, not your code. If it turns out you are wrong, you should > >> fix it ASAP. This is the bare minimum requirement for all committers: BE > >> RESPONSIBLE. > >>> > >>> I'm aware of the argument for using protected master: It make sure that > >> master is stable. > >>> > >>> Well, master will be most stable if we stop adding any commits to it. > >> But that's not what we want is it? > >>> > >>> Protected master hardly adds any stability. The faulty tests that > breaks > >> master at random got merged into master because they happened to succeed > >> once. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Junyuan Xie > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Best Regards, > > Gautam Kumar >
