; To: "dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org" <dev@systemml.incubator.
> apache.org>
> > Date: 04/28/2017 11:09 AM
> > Subject: Re: Build passed/failed messages for pull requests
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Agree, these messages are distractions.
> >
.incubator.apache.org>
> Date: 04/28/2017 11:09 AM
> Subject: Re: Build passed/failed messages for pull requests
>
>
>
>
> Agree, these messages are distractions.
> Arvind Surve | Spark Technology Center | http://www.spark.tc/
>
> From: Matthias Boehm <mboe
My preference is option 3.
Thanks,
Glenn
From: Arvind Surve <ac...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
To: "dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org"
<dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
Date: 04/28/2017 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: Build passed/failed messages for
Agree, these messages are distractions.
Arvind Surve | Spark Technology Center | http://www.spark.tc/
From: Matthias Boehm <mboe...@googlemail.com>
To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Build passed/failed messages for pull re
as I commented on one of these github comments, I'm strongly against
these kind of unnecessary messages because they distract from the actual
discussions. I already had to change my notification settings
accordingly - essentially I'm not watching SystemML's PR activity any
more.
Regards,
I like option (2) as well.
It is difficult for a new contributor to know the URL for the Jenkins
server.
In so far as this may be considered spam, I would suggest that this can be
controlled using the notification settings on github and filters on your
email server/client.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017
Hi,
When a pull request is created or another commit is pushed to that pull
request, a build including running our test suite is performed (Jenkins at
https://sparktc.ibmcloud.com/jenkins/job/SystemML-PullRequestBuilder/).
This is the same model that other projects such as Apache Spark use
