It's not inappropriate but I encourage the community to try for consensus before voting.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 11:07 AM Geoffrey Jacoby <gjac...@apache.org> wrote: > Andrew, > > If the vote was inappropriate, my apologies -- it was my offline suggestion > to Priyank to call one when he felt he was ready to proceed. There had been > a general discussion on the list on the matter about a month ago that was > generally supportive of the idea, but was preliminary and didn't seem broad > enough for a big change to the development pipeline. I didn't want the > discussion to take place on a JIRA or PR that many might miss. > > I suggested a vote as a forcing function to have a broader discussion that > might not happen otherwise -- which is what happened. > > If there was a better approach more in keeping with the Apache Way, please > let me know either here (maybe in a different thread) or offline. :-) > > Geoffrey > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:50 AM Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Point of order Apache communities generally do not vote to achieve > > consensus. That should be a last resort. Please do not vote to make these > > kinds of decisions. > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM Priyank Porwal <priyankpor...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > [Converting this thread to a community vote] > > > > > > I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some > > > success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout - > > > https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3 > > > > > > Things to note: > > > 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits > > are > > > pushed. No additional developer action is necessary. > > > 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which > > > produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed > > > reports linked from the PR as well. > > > 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging > > the > > > PR. > > > 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too > long > > > for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job > is > > > 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several > > jobs, > > > but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal. > > > 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration > > (one-time) > > > and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular > PR. > > > Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner. > > > > > > Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and > CodeCov. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Priyank > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva > > > <tdsi...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis > > CI > > > > will automatically runs all the tests > > > > and post the results to the PR. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gjac...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like > this > > > > would > > > > > be good. > > > > > > > > > > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our > > code > > > > > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, > so > > > > > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus. > > > > > > > > > > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's > home > > > > > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free. > > > > > > > > > > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation > > gotchas > > > > I'd > > > > > be a +1. > > > > > > > > > > Geoffrey > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra > > > > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/ > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen < > > > wills...@marinsoftware.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this. > > > > > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pbo...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT) > > > takes > > > > > > ~2h. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, < > > tdsi...@salesforce.com > > > > > > > .invalid> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for > new > > > > > > > contributors > > > > > > > > to run tests > > > > > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch > > doesn't > > > > > break > > > > > > > > functionality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal < > > > > > > priyankpor...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI > and > > > > > > > > CodeCoverage > > > > > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and > > integration > > > > > tests > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do > > > > checkstyle > > > > > > > checks > > > > > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of > > manual > > > > > patch > > > > > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into > > code > > > > > > health. > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > Priyank > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > > decrepit hands > > - A23, Crosstalk > > > -- Best regards, Andrew Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's decrepit hands - A23, Crosstalk
