fine with me
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 4:52 PM Marco de Abreu
wrote:
> Considering we're approaching the weekend, I'll switch PR-head off now.
> Also, I will retrigger all PRs in order to have a clean state below all
> PRs. If anybody objects afterwards, we can just
Considering we're approaching the weekend, I'll switch PR-head off now.
Also, I will retrigger all PRs in order to have a clean state below all
PRs. If anybody objects afterwards, we can just flip the switch to
re-enable these builds.
-Marco
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Marco de Abreu <
Thanks for your opinions. Could a committer please contact a mentor in
order to create an Apache Infra ticket to change the protected master
branch from PR-head to PR-merge?
-Marco
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:26 PM, kellen sunderland <
kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Jan 10,
+1
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 6:51 PM, Gautam wrote:
> +1
>
> On Jan 10, 2018 1:25 AM, "Marco de Abreu"
> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > TLDR: We wish to change how PRs are validated, turning off PR-head which
> > tests PRs in their current branch,
+1
On Jan 10, 2018 1:25 AM, "Marco de Abreu"
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> TLDR: We wish to change how PRs are validated, turning off PR-head which
> tests PRs in their current branch, and turning on PR-merge, which tests PRs
> rebased on the current master branch. We
LGTM.
The main reason that I switched the default option PR-merge to PR-head is
because we were adding a bunch of new test cases at that time and the whole
system was not very stable. Testing PR-head is easier to locate the errors in
that PR. Then there is an additional PR-merge test after
Hello,
TLDR: We wish to change how PRs are validated, turning off PR-head which
tests PRs in their current branch, and turning on PR-merge, which tests PRs
rebased on the current master branch. We believe this will catch more
potential errors that would otherwise get merged into master, and it