[VOTE] Apache Geode 1.8.0 RC2

2018-12-05 Thread Alexander Murmann
Hi Apache Geode community, Below you find all the information for the the second release candidate of Geode 1.8.0. All packaging issues related to Geode native should be resolved in this candidate. Everything else is unchanged. Please review and provide feedback, so that the vote can end by the

Re: PowerMock and mock ClassLoader

2018-12-05 Thread Helena Bales
+1 to Galen. I was thinking about the GeodeAwaitility vs. Awaitility rule, but that one only needed the rule because we do still depend on Awaitility. On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 1:49 PM Alexander Murmann wrote: > +1 to Galen's point. We already follow a PR process and if a committer > bypasses that

Re: PowerMock and mock ClassLoader

2018-12-05 Thread Alexander Murmann
+1 to Galen's point. We already follow a PR process and if a committer bypasses that to sneak PowerMock back in, it seems like we have much larger problems. On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 10:35 AM Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > Can we just remove PowerMock from our dependencies and skip the rule? I'd > like

Re: [DISCUSS] LGTM on pull requests

2018-12-05 Thread Jacob Barrett
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17226 > On Dec 5, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Jacob Barrett wrote: > > They are investigating security concerns around the integration. > >> On Dec 5, 2018, at 11:05 AM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote: >> >> Maybe we need to poke infra about this >> >>> On 11/9/18

Re: [DISCUSS] LGTM on pull requests

2018-12-05 Thread Jacob Barrett
They are investigating security concerns around the integration. > On Dec 5, 2018, at 11:05 AM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote: > > Maybe we need to poke infra about this > >> On 11/9/18 3:07 PM, Jacob Barrett wrote: >> I opened a ticket with infra earlier this week to enable PR integration. >> There

Re: [DISCUSS] LGTM on pull requests

2018-12-05 Thread Bruce Schuchardt
Maybe we need to poke infra about this On 11/9/18 3:07 PM, Jacob Barrett wrote: I opened a ticket with infra earlier this week to enable PR integration. There hasn’t been any movement. On Nov 9, 2018, at 3:00 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: As per running periodically , LGTM runs it every Monday.

Re: PowerMock and mock ClassLoader

2018-12-05 Thread Galen O'Sullivan
Can we just remove PowerMock from our dependencies and skip the rule? I'd like to hope we can control our dependencies reasonably well. On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 4:45 PM Ryan McMahon wrote: > +1 to a spotless rule. Unless anyone objects, I’ll look into doing that > after PowerMock is eliminated.