Re: org.jetbrains.annotations does not exist

File | Invalidate Caches / Restart... fixed it. I haven’t had to invalidate caches for over a year and forgot all about it. Thanks, Kirk On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 4:01 PM Kirk Lund wrote: > I'm trying to build in IntelliJ (funny enough) and getting these failures: > > >

org.jetbrains.annotations does not exist

I'm trying to build in IntelliJ (funny enough) and getting these failures: /Users/klund/dev/geode1/geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tx/RemoteOperationMessage.java Error:(25, 33) java: package org.jetbrains.annotations does not exist Error:(299, 4) java: cannot find symbol

Re: [Proposal] Backport GEODE-9045 to support/1.14

Added to blocker list. Thanks for raising this now, and a good reminder that when we do get to 1.14.0.RC1, some extra scrutiny on legal/license-y stuff will be a good thing for PMC members to include in their review. On 3/17/21, 1:49 PM, "Joris Melchior" wrote: +1 On 2021-03-17,

Re: [Proposal] Backport GEODE-9045 to support/1.14

+1 On 2021-03-17, 2:43 PM, "Hale Bales" wrote: Hello, I am putting forward the proposal to backport GEODE-9045 (Rename Redis properties and error messages) to support/1.14 branch, What does GEODE-9045 do? * It renames the redis-port property to

Re: [Proposal] Backport GEODE-9045 to support/1.14

+1 From: Hale Bales Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 11:42 AM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: [Proposal] Backport GEODE-9045 to support/1.14 Hello, I am putting forward the proposal to backport GEODE-9045 (Rename Redis properties and error messages) to

Re: [Proposal] Backport GEODE-9045 to support/1.14

Seems like a no-brainer given the very low risk in the change and that it comes with legal reasons From: Hale Bales Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 11:42 To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: [Proposal] Backport GEODE-9045 to support/1.14 Hello, I am putting

[Proposal] Backport GEODE-9045 to support/1.14

Hello, I am putting forward the proposal to backport GEODE-9045 (Rename Redis properties and error messages) to support/1.14 branch, What does GEODE-9045 do? * It renames the redis-port property to compatible-with-redis-port * It renames the

Re: Concourse geode-native permissions

Hi @Blake Bender, Yes, sorry I forgot to send the link. Thanks, Mario. From: Blake Bender Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 6:17 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: RE: Concourse geode-native permissions I suspect it's this job you

RE: Concourse geode-native permissions

I suspect it's this job you wished to re-run, yes? https://concourse.apachegeode-ci.info/builds/14598 As an immediate measure, I've restarted the job with the same inputs. Thanks, Blake -Original Message- From: Mario Salazar de Torres Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 9:57 AM To:

Re: [DISCUSS] CODEOWNERS mechanism feedback

I think for an active, healthy project community we need to balance two things that are somewhat oppositional: make it easy to contribute and ensure the project meets the needs of our users for stability and robust behaviors in the face of failures. > On Mar 17, 2021, at 9:45 AM, Jacob

Re: Concourse geode-native permissions

Hi, Thanks for your answers. I am aware that I can push an empty commit to trigger CI. Thing is I wouldn't like to waste compute resources in case there is only one job failing. If you say it's possible to request permissions, that'd be ideal. What should be the process to request them? If not

Re: Concourse geode-native permissions

You can also request permission for yourself. If it is a PR you can also push an empty commit, though this will trigger all jobs. Also, if this is a PR make sure you use the re-run with same inputs button, otherwise it will run the most recent PR and not necessarily yours. > On Mar 17, 2021,

Re: Concourse geode-native permissions

Yes, concourse permissions are needed to re-trigger a job. Any past Release Manager should have the necessary permissions, if you can share the job URL. On 3/17/21, 9:37 AM, "Mario Salazar de Torres" wrote: Hi everyone, I am trying to re-run a job that randomly failed in

Re: [DISCUSS] CODEOWNERS mechanism feedback

> On Mar 17, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Nabarun Nag wrote: > > "the review process is taking longer now. " > I agree that the review process is taking a bit longer, but that is the price > I believe needs to be paid to improve the probability of good quality code is > being merged to Geode. More

Re: [DISCUSS] CODEOWNERS mechanism feedback

Hi Alberto! I haven’t looked at PR review throughput metrics. I know that is certainly an interesting measure to keep an eye on w.r.t to the CODEOWNERS / CODEWATCHERS processes. I think another equally interesting metric is the “quality” of PR reviews. This is difficult to measure but you

Re: [DISCUSS] CODEOWNERS mechanism feedback

Hi Alberto, Here are some of my opinions on this matter. "the review process is taking longer now. " I agree that the review process is taking a bit longer, but that is the price I believe needs to be paid to improve the probability of good quality code is being merged to Geode. More eyes on

Concourse geode-native permissions

Hi everyone, I am trying to re-run a job that randomly failed in geode-native's concourse. Thing is I am being answered a 403 when hitting re-run. Do I need any permissions to be able to re-run jobs? Regards, Mario

[DISCUSS] CODEOWNERS mechanism feedback

Hi, It's been more than two months since the CODEOWNERS file has been in place to automatically add reviewers to pull requests. While we have seen the great benefit of having the experts in the matter being automatically assigned as reviewers to each pull request, I have the feeling that the