Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a clear idea of the process and what the expected results will look like.
- I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch. - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and submitted it to my repo - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface. Here is a gif of the process of merging: http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif Here is the result of the repo: https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok. If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the lead in requesting the actions from INFRA? It will be great to *finally* get this PR in :) Thanks, Carin <https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <plus...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB > > And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options for the > web UI button: https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/ > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu > <marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote: > > > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being stripped out > > on email lists. > > > > Chiyuan Zhang <plus...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep. 2018, 03:44: > > > > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or enable > > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a different github > > > project): > > > > > > [image: image.png] > > > > > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid creating > > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical problem). > But > > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could confirm. > > > > > > Best, > > > Chiyuan > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <carinme...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be great. > > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will be out of > > >> communication for a bit > > >> > > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu > > >> <marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and not because > of > > >> some > > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out mentors to > > >> create a > > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch. > > >> > > > >> > -Marco > > >> > > > >> > Carin Meier <carinme...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29. Sep. 2018, > > >> 01:17: > > >> > > > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of master. It > seemed > > >> to go > > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for everyone. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import > > >> > > > > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I think the > > most > > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever way is the > best > > >> to > > >> > > make that happen, let's do it. > > >> > > > > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option? > > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen? > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <plus...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from the github > > >> > > interface > > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe it is good > to > > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using that. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > - It should be technically easier than rebasing due to the > > >> > > > git-subtree-import issue we are currently having > > >> > > > - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on *top* of > > >> current > > >> > > > history > > >> > > > - The downside is probably the history of the project is not > > >> linear > > >> > > > anymore, but I think this is actually what we would like to > > have > > >> for > > >> > > > this > > >> > > > particular case, because the contents of the main repo and > the > > >> julia > > >> > > > branch > > >> > > > actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to have two > tails > > >> with > > >> > > > their > > >> > > > own history. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on the github > > could > > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then pushing the > > button > > >> on > > >> > > the > > >> > > > web might simply work. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Best, > > >> > > > Chiyuan > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier < > carinme...@gmail.com > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in this case. > I > > >> > > > originally > > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the github web > > >> interface, > > >> > but > > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be done outside > it > > >> > because > > >> > > > of > > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier < > > carinme...@gmail.com > > >> > > > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using the subtree > > and > > >> > the > > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to be a > simple, > > >> > "click > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand this task > > off > > >> to > > >> > > > > someone > > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there correctly. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to take this > over? > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, > > >> > > > > > Carin > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy < > > >> mnnav...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and then try > merge > > >> that > > >> > > > > >> branch? > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy < > > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this contribution, > > as > > >> a > > >> > > > general > > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list of commits > is > > >> big > > >> > > and > > >> > > > > you > > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is better so > you > > >> keep > > >> > > > > history > > >> > > > > >> and > > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on top of master > > you > > >> > are > > >> > > > > >> changing > > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be individually > > >> > reverted > > >> > > as > > >> > > > > >> some > > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come from a > > >> mercurial > > >> > > > > >> background, > > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to: > > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase > > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing. > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > Pedro. > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier < > > >> > > carinme...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to summarize the > > >> > feedback > > >> > > > > from > > >> > > > > >> the > > >> > > > > >> >> responses: > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard for very good > > >> > reasons. > > >> > > > > >> However, > > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia language > from > > >> its > > >> > > > > sibling > > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual commits of > > the > > >> > many > > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple years to > make > > >> this > > >> > a > > >> > > > > great > > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge for it. > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using a tag. I > > think > > >> we > > >> > > can > > >> > > > > try > > >> > > > > >> it > > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other ways to > browse > > >> the > > >> > > > commit > > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can add the > tag > > >> > > > > >> retroactively if > > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble. > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR using the > > above > > >> > > method > > >> > > > in > > >> > > > > >> my > > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST). > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to having the Julia > > >> > > community > > >> > > > > >> join the > > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration with them. > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> Best, > > >> > > > > >> >> Carin > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan Zhang < > > >> > > plus...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for the > > >> > aforementioned > > >> > > > > issue, > > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit before the > > merge, > > >> so > > >> > > that > > >> > > > > in > > >> > > > > >> >> case > > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo commits by > > >> skipping > > >> > > > this > > >> > > > > >> big > > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer to take > his > > or > > >> > her > > >> > > > hand > > >> > > > > >> on. > > >> > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > >> >>> Best, > > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan > > >> > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai < > > >> > jason....@gmail.com > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and track the > > >> > contributions. > > >> > > > > >> >>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks, > > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason > > >> > > > > >> >>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron Markham < > > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.mark...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the efforts of all > of > > >> the > > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors. > > >> > > > > >> >>>> If > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim it down > from > > >> 700+ > > >> > > > > commits > > >> > > > > >> >>> then > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy < > > >> > mnnav...@gmail.com > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1 individual, if we > > squash > > >> > merge > > >> > > > > we'll > > >> > > > > >> >>> not > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of those > > individuals. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi Chen < > > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase merge is that > it > > >> > > preserves > > >> > > > > >> >> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package contributors, and > > given > > >> > that > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has always been a > > >> > > high-quality > > >> > > > > >> >>>> language > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here to > preserve > > >> the > > >> > > > commit > > >> > > > > >> >>>> history > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the Julia binding > and > > >> > > welcome > > >> > > > > >> >> them > > >> > > > > >> >>> to > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi Chen < > > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would suggest rebase > and > > >> > merge. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit log of the > > Julia > > >> > > > binding > > >> > > > > >> >> is > > >> > > > > >> >>>> not > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there has been > done > > >> > > through > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the developer of > > the > > >> > > > effort. > > >> > > > > >> >> It > > >> > > > > >> >>>> is > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the commits more > > >> > easily. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin Meier < > > >> > > > > >> >>> carinme...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan, > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some clarity of the > > >> pros > > >> > and > > >> > > > > >> >> cons > > >> > > > > >> >>> of > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the right > > decision. > > >> I > > >> > > think > > >> > > > > >> >>> some > > >> > > > > >> >>>> of > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I will take a > stab > > >> > below > > >> > > at > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed any. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Pros* - It is the project standard > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> - It will provide one commit for the > > feature > > >> > and > > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of master. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> - It is easier for a user to do git log > to > > >> > browse > > >> > > > > >> >>> commits > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Cons* - I don't know how github would handle > > >> squashing > > >> > > all > > >> > > > > >> >>>> those > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too much? > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> - You lose the granularity of the > > features > > >> > > > > >> >>> individual > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit message > with > > >> one > > >> > > > > >> >> commit > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> - You do have the granularity of the > > >> > individual > > >> > > > > >> >>>> features > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project standard > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> - You have 700+ commits on top of > master > > >> that > > >> > > > might > > >> > > > > >> >>> be > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right before. (like > > someone > > >> > > > browsing > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits) > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan Zhang < > > >> > > > > >> >>> plus...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin, > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of the two > > >> > approaches? > > >> > > Is > > >> > > > > >> >>> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g. preserving > the > > >> > history > > >> > > > of > > >> > > > > >> >>> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical issue (e.g. > > >> using > > >> > > > squash > > >> > > > > >> >>>> might > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that might be > > >> difficult > > >> > or > > >> > > > > >> >> hard > > >> > > > > >> >>> to > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)? > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely that someone > > is > > >> > going > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But preserving the > > >> commit > > >> > > > > >> >> history > > >> > > > > >> >>> is > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the change or > > >> bisect > > >> > for > > >> > > > > >> >> some > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR actually > > >> contains > > >> > > 700+ > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits, > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development of the Julia > > >> > binding > > >> > > > > >> >>> started > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started with a separate > > >> repo > > >> > due > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > >> >>> the > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of julia. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin Meier < > > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinme...@gmail.com > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,( > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149 > > >> > ), > > >> > > is > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of the large > > number > > >> of > > >> > > > > >> >>> commits > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual "Squash and > > Merge". > > >> > The > > >> > > > > >> >>> only > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging with a > merge > > >> > commit > > >> > > is > > >> > > > > >> >>> not > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project. > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits from this > branch > > >> will > > >> > > be > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all the commit > > >> > messages > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined) > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from this > branch > > >> will > > >> > > be > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github won't show > > all > > >> of > > >> > > > > >> >> them) > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle the merge? > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>>> > > >> > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > >> >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
