Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-27 Thread Lars Vogel 
Friends of Eclipse,

To summarize the analysis of various people: Looks like neither of the
three reported issues were caused by recent changes.

The following two issue seems to be have been "just" flaky tests, we
did not see the failure happen again.

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353

The last bug could also not be traced back to any recent changes and
resulted in deactivation of the tests on Windows.

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355

Thanks to Andrey for watching the tests.

Thanks to Kaylan, Dani, Noopur and Paul for looking into the related tests.

Especially a big thanks to Paul who fixed various test issues over the
last few days which makes our tests less flaky. For an example, see
his fix and impressive analysis in
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=541448#c5.

Best regards, Lars





On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:48 PM Aleksandar Kurtakov  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:29 PM Lakshmi P Shanmugam  
> wrote:
>>
>> > Mac and Windows builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even 
>> > more!).
>> The Mac and Windows builds are stable. But, the tests in e4.ui.tests and 
>> ui.tests.* have been failing, many of them for several releases. It should 
>> be investigated if the tests are unstable.
>
>
> We can go into semantic analysis of what stable means of course :) but the 
> simple fact is I go to 
> https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops4/I20200121-2225/ and I 
> claim all unstable (until looking into the tests themselves). And I know many 
> would not do that.
>
>>
>>
>> Kalyan has been opening bugs for the failing tests and investigating many of 
>> them. Bug numbers for all failing tests in 4.15M1 are in comment 
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=558953#c7. Component owners or 
>> people familiar with the affected areas need to investigate the failing 
>> tests to see if they are real problems in the code.
>>
>> Since these long failing ones affect developers from seeing new failures, 
>> they could disable the tests for the failing platform and open a bug for 
>> tracking and investigation.
>
>
> If this is the best path forward I recommend anyone that cares about these 
> platforms to step up and do it.
>
>>
>> We did this in 4.14 for the 2 SWT tests that were failing for a long time on 
>> the Mac test machine.
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Lakshmi P Shanmugam,
>> Eclipse Platform Co-lead,
>> India Software Lab, Bangalore
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original message -
>> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov 
>> Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
>> To: "Eclipse platform general developers list." 
>> Cc:
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again
>> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>>
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>>
>> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test coverage 
>> is not the best.
>>
>> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" 
>> for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>>
>> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week of 
>> my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>>
>> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see 
>> anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>>
>> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the work 
>> I do:
>>
>> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify 
>> new failures
>> 2) Report bugs for new failures
>> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>>
>> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" 
>> of mass changes.
>> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is 
>> "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>>
>>
>> This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows builds 
>> are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is long enough 
>> period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring test res

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-22 Thread Aleksandar Kurtakov 
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:29 PM Lakshmi P Shanmugam 
wrote:

> > Mac and Windows builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even
> more!).
> The Mac and Windows builds are stable. But, the tests in e4.ui.tests and
> ui.tests.* have been failing, many of them for several releases. It should
> be investigated if the tests are unstable.
>

We can go into semantic analysis of what stable means of course :) but the
simple fact is I go to
https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops4/I20200121-2225/ and I
claim all unstable (until looking into the tests themselves). And I know
many would not do that.


>
> Kalyan has been opening bugs for the failing tests and investigating many
> of them. Bug numbers for all failing tests in 4.15M1 are in comment
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=558953#c7. Component owners
> or people familiar with the affected areas need to investigate the failing
> tests to see if they are real problems in the code.
>
> Since these long failing ones affect developers from seeing new failures,
> they could disable the tests for the failing platform and open a bug for
> tracking and investigation.
>

If this is the best path forward I recommend anyone that cares about these
platforms to step up and do it.


> We did this in 4.14 for the 2 SWT tests that were failing for a long time
> on the Mac test machine.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Lakshmi P Shanmugam,
> Eclipse Platform Co-lead,
> India Software Lab, Bangalore
>
>
>
> - Original message -
> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov 
> Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
> To: "Eclipse platform general developers list." 
> Cc:
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again
> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>
> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
> coverage is not the best.
>
> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes"
> for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>
> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week
> of my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>
> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see
> anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>
> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the
> work I do:
>
> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify
> new failures
> 2) Report bugs for new failures
> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>
> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit"
> of mass changes.
> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is
> "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>
>
> This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows builds
> are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is long enough
> period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring test results on
> Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks Andrey for still
> checking them!).
> IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be
> fixed ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure
> finally means there is something to be looked at. As it should have always
> been.
> Lakshmi, Niraj, as you're respective SWT port maintainers and the long
> failing tests are UI related: What is your opinion on this?
>
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrey Loskutov
>
> Спасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающих
>
> https://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov
>
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Alexander Kurtakov
> Red Hat Eclipse Team
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
>
>
>
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@eclipse.org
>

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-22 Thread Lakshmi P Shanmugam 
> Mac and Windows builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!).
The Mac and Windows builds are stable. But, the tests in e4.ui.tests and ui.tests.* have been failing, many of them for several releases. It should be investigated if the tests are unstable.
 
Kalyan has been opening bugs for the failing tests and investigating many of them. Bug numbers for all failing tests in 4.15M1 are in comment https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=558953#c7. Component owners or people familiar with the affected areas need to investigate the failing tests to see if they are real problems in the code.
 
Since these long failing ones affect developers from seeing new failures, they could disable the tests for the failing platform and open a bug for tracking and investigation. We did this in 4.14 for the 2 SWT tests that were failing for a long time on the Mac test machine.
 
Thanks & Regards,Lakshmi P Shanmugam,Eclipse Platform Co-lead,India Software Lab, Bangalore
 
 
- Original message -From: Aleksandar Kurtakov Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.orgTo: "Eclipse platform general developers list." Cc:Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes againDate: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM 
  

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:
Hi,we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've openedhttps://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test coverage is not the best.I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week of my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the work I do:1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify new failures2) Report bugs for new failures3) Identify offending commits and notify authorsIf this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" of mass changes.If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
 
This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is long enough period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring test results on Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks Andrey for still checking them!).
IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be fixed ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure finally means there is something to be looked at. As it should have always been.
Lakshmi, Niraj, as you're respective SWT port maintainers and the long failing tests are UI related: What is your opinion on this?
 
 
Kind regards,Andrey LoskutovСпасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающихhttps://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov___platform-dev mailing listplatform-dev@eclipse.orgTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev--
Alexander KurtakovRed Hat Eclipse Team
___platform-dev mailing listplatform-dev@eclipse.orgTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
 

___
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Lars Vogel 
>>> >code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>>> >>
>>> >> I agree with Andrey that may be we should rethink on the strategy of
>>> >mass changes as it takes a lot of productive time of a few committers
>>> >in going through the changes and analysing the regressions unless other
>>> >committers come forward to share this responsibility.
>>> >>
>>> >> In the past, most of the regressions caused by mass changes are OS
>>> >independent for example:
>>> >>
>>> >> Gerrit  https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ caused 4.15 M1 respin
>>> >with Bug 558991.
>>> >> Gerrit https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/144099/ causing Bug 549222
>>> >> Commit
>>> >https://git.eclipse.org/c/pde/eclipse.pde.ui.git/commit/?id=176312d9c10572510576b11df4e711a4d118025e
>>> >causing Bug 553276
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> With power comes responsibility and the contributor/committer and the
>>> >reviewers must take the responsibility to test the impacted areas in UI
>>> >as we don't have enough test coverage. Before merging any
>>> >contributor/committer and the reviewers can seek help from the
>>> >community to test on other platforms if they don't have access to them.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> >> Sarika
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> - Original message -
>>> >> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov 
>>> >> Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
>>> >> To: "Eclipse platform general developers list."
>>> >
>>> >> Cc:
>>> >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again
>>> >> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov 
>>> >wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>>> >>
>>> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
>>> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
>>> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>>> >>
>>> >> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
>>> >coverage is not the best.
>>> >>
>>> >> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass
>>> >changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>>> >>
>>> >> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work
>>> >week of my time, was
>>> >https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I
>>> >don't see anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>>> >>
>>> >> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do
>>> >the work I do:
>>> >>
>>> >> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and
>>> >identify new failures
>>> >> 2) Report bugs for new failures
>>> >> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>>> >>
>>> >> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the
>>> >"benefit" of mass changes.
>>> >> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the
>>> >code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows
>>> >builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is
>>> >long enough period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring
>>> >test results on Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks
>>> >Andrey for still checking them!).
>>> >> IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be
>>> >fixed ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure
>>> >finally means there is something to be looked at. As it should have
>>> >always been.
>>> >> Lakshmi, Niraj, as

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Aleksandar Kurtakov 
11a4d118025e
>> >causing Bug 553276
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> With power comes responsibility and the contributor/committer and the
>> >reviewers must take the responsibility to test the impacted areas in UI
>> >as we don't have enough test coverage. Before merging any
>> >contributor/committer and the reviewers can seek help from the
>> >community to test on other platforms if they don't have access to them.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> >> Sarika
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> - Original message -
>> >> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov 
>> >> Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
>> >> To: "Eclipse platform general developers list."
>> >
>> >> Cc:
>> >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again
>> >> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov 
>> >wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>> >>
>> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
>> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
>> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>> >>
>> >> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
>> >coverage is not the best.
>> >>
>> >> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass
>> >changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>> >>
>> >> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work
>> >week of my time, was
>> >https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>> >>
>> >> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I
>> >don't see anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>> >>
>> >> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do
>> >the work I do:
>> >>
>> >> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and
>> >identify new failures
>> >> 2) Report bugs for new failures
>> >> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>> >>
>> >> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the
>> >"benefit" of mass changes.
>> >> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the
>> >code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows
>> >builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is
>> >long enough period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring
>> >test results on Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks
>> >Andrey for still checking them!).
>> >> IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be
>> >fixed ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure
>> >finally means there is something to be looked at. As it should have
>> >always been.
>> >> Lakshmi, Niraj, as you're respective SWT port maintainers and the
>> >long failing tests are UI related: What is your opinion on this?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Kind regards,
>> >> Andrey Loskutov
>> >>
>> >> Спасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающих
>> >>
>> >> https://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov
>> >>
>> >> ___
>> >> platform-dev mailing list
>> >> platform-dev@eclipse.org
>> >> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
>> >unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> >> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Alexander Kurtakov
>> >> Red Hat Eclipse Team
>> >> ___
>> >> platform-dev mailing list
>> >> platform-dev@eclipse.org
>> >> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
>> >unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> >> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-d

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Lars Vogel 
Andrey,

This comment sound a bit aggressive and without a clear benefit. Please
avoid such comments. If my comment to Sarika sounded the same way, I'm
sorry that was not the intention.

I think we all agree that change can cause issues and that no change do not
cause direct issues. But changes also have benefits. For example look at
the performance tests for 4.15 in which we improved in almost all areas.

The normal process is that if a change creates issues we fix or revert it.
Yesterday was bad in the sense that lots of stuff was merged at the same
day and that we hand several build issues before that.

The PMC discussed today that we will try to rerun the tests, if that does
not work restart the test machine and if that does not fix the tests try to
revert the changes.

Best regards, Lars


Andrey Loskutov  schrieb am Di., 21. Jan. 2020, 18:30:

> Lars,
>
> you don't really want me to provide you list of all regressions I've seen
> caused by mass changes, or do you?
>
> Am 21. Januar 2020 18:09:21 MEZ schrieb Lars Vogel  >:
> >Sarika,
> >
> >only one of your examples is a "mass change". Both
> >https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ and
> >https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/153288/ changed only one file.
> >
> >Best regards, Lars
> >
> >On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:45 PM Sarika Sinha 
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
> >coverage is not the best.
> >>
> >> > I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass
> >changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
> >> > If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the
> >"benefit" of mass changes.
> >> > If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the
> >code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
> >>
> >> I agree with Andrey that may be we should rethink on the strategy of
> >mass changes as it takes a lot of productive time of a few committers
> >in going through the changes and analysing the regressions unless other
> >committers come forward to share this responsibility.
> >>
> >> In the past, most of the regressions caused by mass changes are OS
> >independent for example:
> >>
> >> Gerrit  https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ caused 4.15 M1 respin
> >with Bug 558991.
> >> Gerrit https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/144099/ causing Bug 549222
> >> Commit
> >
> https://git.eclipse.org/c/pde/eclipse.pde.ui.git/commit/?id=176312d9c10572510576b11df4e711a4d118025e
> >causing Bug 553276
> >>
> >>
> >> With power comes responsibility and the contributor/committer and the
> >reviewers must take the responsibility to test the impacted areas in UI
> >as we don't have enough test coverage. Before merging any
> >contributor/committer and the reviewers can seek help from the
> >community to test on other platforms if they don't have access to them.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >> Sarika
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> - Original message -
> >> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov 
> >> Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
> >> To: "Eclipse platform general developers list."
> >
> >> Cc:
> >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again
> >> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov 
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
> >>
> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
> >>
> >> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
> >coverage is not the best.
> >>
> >> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass
> >changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
> >>
> >> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work
> >week of my time, was
> >https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
> >>
> >> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I
> >don't see anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
> >>
> >> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do
> >the

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Andrey Loskutov 
Lars,

you don't really want me to provide you list of all regressions I've seen 
caused by mass changes, or do you?

Am 21. Januar 2020 18:09:21 MEZ schrieb Lars Vogel :
>Sarika,
>
>only one of your examples is a "mass change". Both
>https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ and
>https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/153288/ changed only one file.
>
>Best regards, Lars
>
>On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:45 PM Sarika Sinha 
>wrote:
>>
>> > And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
>coverage is not the best.
>>
>> > I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass
>changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>> > If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the
>"benefit" of mass changes.
>> > If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the
>code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>>
>> I agree with Andrey that may be we should rethink on the strategy of
>mass changes as it takes a lot of productive time of a few committers
>in going through the changes and analysing the regressions unless other
>committers come forward to share this responsibility.
>>
>> In the past, most of the regressions caused by mass changes are OS
>independent for example:
>>
>> Gerrit  https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ caused 4.15 M1 respin
>with Bug 558991.
>> Gerrit https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/144099/ causing Bug 549222
>> Commit
>https://git.eclipse.org/c/pde/eclipse.pde.ui.git/commit/?id=176312d9c10572510576b11df4e711a4d118025e
>causing Bug 553276
>>
>>
>> With power comes responsibility and the contributor/committer and the
>reviewers must take the responsibility to test the impacted areas in UI
>as we don't have enough test coverage. Before merging any
>contributor/committer and the reviewers can seek help from the
>community to test on other platforms if they don't have access to them.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Sarika
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original message -
>> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov 
>> Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
>> To: "Eclipse platform general developers list."
>
>> Cc:
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again
>> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov 
>wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>>
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>>
>> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
>coverage is not the best.
>>
>> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass
>changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>>
>> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work
>week of my time, was
>https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>>
>> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I
>don't see anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>>
>> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do
>the work I do:
>>
>> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and
>identify new failures
>> 2) Report bugs for new failures
>> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>>
>> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the
>"benefit" of mass changes.
>> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the
>code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>>
>>
>> This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows
>builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is
>long enough period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring
>test results on Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks
>Andrey for still checking them!).
>> IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be
>fixed ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure
>finally means there is something to be looked at. As it should have
>always been.
>> Lakshmi, Niraj, as you're respective SWT port maintainers and the
>long failing tests are UI related: What is your opinion on this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Andrey Loskutov
>>
>> Спас

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Lars Vogel 
Sarika,

only one of your examples is a "mass change". Both
https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ and
https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/153288/ changed only one file.

Best regards, Lars

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:45 PM Sarika Sinha  wrote:
>
> > And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test 
> > coverage is not the best.
>
> > I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" 
> > for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
> > If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" 
> > of mass changes.
> > If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is 
> > "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>
> I agree with Andrey that may be we should rethink on the strategy of mass 
> changes as it takes a lot of productive time of a few committers in going 
> through the changes and analysing the regressions unless other committers 
> come forward to share this responsibility.
>
> In the past, most of the regressions caused by mass changes are OS 
> independent for example:
>
> Gerrit  https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ caused 4.15 M1 respin with Bug 
> 558991.
> Gerrit https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/144099/ causing Bug 549222
> Commit 
> https://git.eclipse.org/c/pde/eclipse.pde.ui.git/commit/?id=176312d9c10572510576b11df4e711a4d118025e
>  causing Bug 553276
>
>
> With power comes responsibility and the contributor/committer and the 
> reviewers must take the responsibility to test the impacted areas in UI as we 
> don't have enough test coverage. Before merging any contributor/committer and 
> the reviewers can seek help from the community to test on other platforms if 
> they don't have access to them.
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Sarika
>
>
>
> ----- Original message -
> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov 
> Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
> To: "Eclipse platform general developers list." 
> Cc:
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again
> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>
> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test coverage 
> is not the best.
>
> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" for 
> no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>
> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week of 
> my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>
> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see 
> anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>
> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the work 
> I do:
>
> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify new 
> failures
> 2) Report bugs for new failures
> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>
> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" of 
> mass changes.
> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is 
> "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>
>
> This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows builds 
> are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is long enough 
> period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring test results on 
> Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks Andrey for still 
> checking them!).
> IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be fixed 
> ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure finally means 
> there is something to be looked at. As it should have always been.
> Lakshmi, Niraj, as you're respective SWT port maintainers and the long 
> failing tests are UI related: What is your opinion on this?
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrey Loskutov
>
> Спасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающих
>
> https://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov
>
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
> this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Alexander Kurtakov
> Red Hat Eclipse Te

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Sarika Sinha 
> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test coverage is not the best.> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" of mass changes.> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
 
I agree with Andrey that may be we should rethink on the strategy of mass changes as it takes a lot of productive time of a few committers in going through the changes and analysing the regressions unless other committers come forward to share this responsibility.
 
In the past, most of the regressions caused by mass changes are OS independent for example:
Gerrit  https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/154926/ caused 4.15 M1 respin with Bug 558991.Gerrit https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/144099/ causing Bug 549222Commit https://git.eclipse.org/c/pde/eclipse.pde.ui.git/commit/?id=176312d9c10572510576b11df4e711a4d118025e causing Bug 553276
 
With power comes responsibility and the contributor/committer and the reviewers must take the responsibility to test the impacted areas in UI as we don't have enough test coverage. Before merging any contributor/committer and the reviewers can seek help from the community to test on other platforms if they don't have access to them.
 
 
 
Thanks & Regards,
Sarika
 
 
- Original message -From: Aleksandar Kurtakov Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.orgTo: "Eclipse platform general developers list." Cc:Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes againDate: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 2:42 PM 
  

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:
Hi,we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've openedhttps://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test coverage is not the best.I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week of my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the work I do:1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify new failures2) Report bugs for new failures3) Identify offending commits and notify authorsIf this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" of mass changes.If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
 
This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows builds are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is long enough period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring test results on Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks Andrey for still checking them!).
IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be fixed ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure finally means there is something to be looked at. As it should have always been.
Lakshmi, Niraj, as you're respective SWT port maintainers and the long failing tests are UI related: What is your opinion on this?
 
Kind regards,Andrey LoskutovСпасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающихhttps://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov___platform-dev mailing listplatform-dev@eclipse.orgTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev--
Alexander KurtakovRed Hat Eclipse Team
___platform-dev mailing listplatform-dev@eclipse.orgTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
 

___
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Noopur Gupta 
I have restarted the tests for I20200120-1800 on the Windows test machine to see if the failures repeat. 
 
Regards,
Noopur
 
- Original message -From: Lars Vogel Sent by: platform-dev-boun...@eclipse.orgTo: "Eclipse platform general developers list." Cc:Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes againDate: Tue, Jan 21, 2020 5:09 PM 
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:55 AM Lars Vogel  wrote:> I will try to setup a Windows machine to see if these are real errors> or only a temporary issue with the Windows test machine. Looking at> the test history of our recent builds, the Windows machine always had> test errors which other machines did not have.Noopur was kind enough to run the failing JDT UI tests on Windowslocally and they also passed. Seehttps://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352> Anyone knows how to check / rest the Windows test machine?To me it sounds like is is likely that the test machine is having(temporary???) issues.___platform-dev mailing listplatform-dev@eclipse.orgTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev 
 

___
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Lars Vogel 
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:55 AM Lars Vogel  wrote:

> I will try to setup a Windows machine to see if these are real errors
> or only a temporary issue with the Windows test machine. Looking at
> the test history of our recent builds, the Windows machine always had
> test errors which other machines did not have.

Noopur was kind enough to run the failing JDT UI tests on Windows
locally and they also passed. See
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352

> Anyone knows how to check / rest the Windows test machine?

To me it sounds like is is likely that the test machine is having
(temporary???) issues.
___
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Aleksandar Kurtakov 
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>
> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test
> coverage is not the best.
>
> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes"
> for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>
> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week
> of my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>
> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see
> anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>
> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the
> work I do:
>
> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify
> new failures
> 2) Report bugs for new failures
> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>
> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit"
> of mass changes.
> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is
> "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>

This actually brings one very significant problem - Mac and Windows builds
are unstable for probably a year now (or even more!). This is long enough
period for contributors to gain the habbit of just ignoring test results on
Mac and Windows. I can't blame anyone for that (thanks Andrey for still
checking them!).
IMHO is current failing tests on Mac and Windows tests can't/won't be fixed
ASAP - these should be run only on Linux so seeing test failure finally
means there is something to be looked at. As it should have always been.
Lakshmi, Niraj, as you're respective SWT port maintainers and the long
failing tests are UI related: What is your opinion on this?


>
> Kind regards,
> Andrey Loskutov
>
> Спасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающих
>
> https://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov
>
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev



-- 
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse Team
___
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Peter Kriens 
I guess you have your own infrastructure but you can freely build open source 
projects with Github actions. They provide Linux, Windows, and Mac.

At bndtools we build on all. A few years ago we started to build on Windows for 
similar reasons you seem to experience now. It took us a number of months to 
work out all the bugs, there were quite a few. Confirming my prejudices against 
Windows over and over again :-)

Building with Github actions is frighteningly easy, you can look at the bnd 
build for an example. We build on many different Java versions and platforms.


https://github.com/bndtools/bnd/blob/master/.github/workflows/cibuild.yml 


Kind regards,

Peter Kriens



> On 21 Jan 2020, at 09:55, Lars Vogel  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> The test failures are not reproducable on Gerrit nor locally on Linux.
> 
> I will try to setup a Windows machine to see if these are real errors
> or only a temporary issue with the Windows test machine. Looking at
> the test history of our recent builds, the Windows machine always had
> test errors which other machines did not have.
> 
> Anyone knows how to check / rest the Windows test machine?
> 
> Best regards, Lars
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>> 
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>> 
>> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test coverage 
>> is not the best.
>> 
>> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" 
>> for no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>> 
>> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week of 
>> my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>> 
>> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see 
>> anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>> 
>> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the work 
>> I do:
>> 
>> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify 
>> new failures
>> 2) Report bugs for new failures
>> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>> 
>> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" 
>> of mass changes.
>> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is 
>> "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Andrey Loskutov
>> 
>> Спасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающих
>> 
>> https://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov
>> 
>> ___
>> platform-dev mailing list
>> platform-dev@eclipse.org
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
>> this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Eclipse Platform project co-lead
> CEO vogella GmbH
> 
> Haindaalwisch 17a, 22395 Hamburg
> Amtsgericht Hamburg: HRB 127058
> Geschäftsführer: Lars Vogel, Jennifer Nerlich de Vogel
> USt-IdNr.: DE284122352
> Fax (040) 5247 6322, Email: lars.vo...@vogella.com, Web: 
> http://www.vogella.com
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
> this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

___
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

Re: [platform-dev] Mass changes again

2020-01-21 Thread Lars Vogel 
Hi all,

The test failures are not reproducable on Gerrit nor locally on Linux.

I will try to setup a Windows machine to see if these are real errors
or only a temporary issue with the Windows test machine. Looking at
the test history of our recent builds, the Windows machine always had
test errors which other machines did not have.

Anyone knows how to check / rest the Windows test machine?

Best regards, Lars



On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:46 AM Andrey Loskutov  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we had numerous regressions in two last builds, I've opened
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559352
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559353
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559355
>
> And I guess there are more, we just don't see them because our test coverage 
> is not the best.
>
> I don't know why should we continue this practice of blind "mass changes" for 
> no good reason, that caused so many regressions so far.
>
> My best example of such regression, on which I've spent a full work week of 
> my time, was https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=551147.
>
> I'm tired to spend my time to do house keeping for others, and I don't see 
> anyone else doing this work. I don't think this is fair.
>
> I would propose that committers that merge "mass changes" *must* do the work 
> I do:
>
> 1) Check SDK build results after integration of mass changes and identify new 
> failures
> 2) Report bugs for new failures
> 3) Identify offending commits and notify authors
>
> If this sounds as too much work, I would propose to re-think the "benefit" of 
> mass changes.
> If we continue in the same way as today, at some point in time the code is 
> "fully optimized" but Eclipse is not usable anymore.
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrey Loskutov
>
> Спасение утопающих - дело рук самих утопающих
>
> https://www.eclipse.org/user/aloskutov
>
> ___
> platform-dev mailing list
> platform-dev@eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
> this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev



--
Eclipse Platform project co-lead
CEO vogella GmbH

Haindaalwisch 17a, 22395 Hamburg
Amtsgericht Hamburg: HRB 127058
Geschäftsführer: Lars Vogel, Jennifer Nerlich de Vogel
USt-IdNr.: DE284122352
Fax (040) 5247 6322, Email: lars.vo...@vogella.com, Web: http://www.vogella.com
___
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev