You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org> on 2014/11/03 05:40:21 UTC
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
It feels like as a community we are running away from making any changes to
the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never act on
it.
What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right? or
are we just shying away from any change?
~Rajani
PS: We could still do a blank merge(-s ours) from 4.5 to master and
continue.
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:06 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Can we atleast follow the merge part of it? ie) commit to 4.5 and then
> > merge 4.5 to master?
> >
> > merging wont be easy unless everybody agrees and does merge for their
> > commits.
> >
>
> It won't work; master and 4.5 have both diverged, even if it's very
> small at this point.
> Daan and I both seemed to come to this conclusion last week:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/sumgmlo4avgjquym
> http://markmail.org/message/wazq4lz47v22mynz
>
> --David
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Posted by Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com>.
I share your frustration Rajani, I made some steps which I feel are
turned back now. I am giving up and really not feeling this is worth
my effort anymore.
People don't take the effort to commit on a branch. gating commits is
and will not solve unwillingness. It will slow us down at committing
bugs and force us to make more elaborate bugs at best.
merge forward is easy to implement *if we want it*. wanting is is a
must have prequisite.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org> wrote:
> These problems existed for 4.4 and the same continued to 4.5. Despite
> discussing lot of things, we didnt act on anything and we are continuing
> the same to 4.6
>
> There is no plan whatsoever to address any of those issues.
>
> ~Rajani
>
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 2:33 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
>> >
>> > It feels like as a community we are running away from making any changes
>> to
>> > the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never act
>> on
>> > it.
>>
>> I don't think we are running away from them. I certainly hope not.
>> There are competing demands (like everything)
>> 1. We want to ship 4.5
>> 2. We want to have new features being developed
>> 3. We want to fix quality issues
>> 4. We want to fix process issues
>>
>> Each of those is at odds with each other. They are also hard problems,
>> and frankly most of them are as much a cultural problem as a technical
>> problem.
>>
>> >
>> > What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right? or
>> > are we just shying away from any change?
>> >
>>
>> We are saying that #2 forced us to fork 4.5 into a different branch.
>> Master and 4.5 are now diverging, and we want to #1 to happen. 1 & 2
>> are incompatible on the same branch, but their competition is keeping
>> 3 and 4 at bay.
>>
>> That doesn't mean we shouldn't change, but you can only pull in so
>> many directions without things coming apart.
>>
>> --David
>>
--
Daan
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Posted by Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>.
These problems existed for 4.4 and the same continued to 4.5. Despite
discussing lot of things, we didnt act on anything and we are continuing
the same to 4.6
There is no plan whatsoever to address any of those issues.
~Rajani
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 2:33 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
> >
> > It feels like as a community we are running away from making any changes
> to
> > the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never act
> on
> > it.
>
> I don't think we are running away from them. I certainly hope not.
> There are competing demands (like everything)
> 1. We want to ship 4.5
> 2. We want to have new features being developed
> 3. We want to fix quality issues
> 4. We want to fix process issues
>
> Each of those is at odds with each other. They are also hard problems,
> and frankly most of them are as much a cultural problem as a technical
> problem.
>
> >
> > What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right? or
> > are we just shying away from any change?
> >
>
> We are saying that #2 forced us to fork 4.5 into a different branch.
> Master and 4.5 are now diverging, and we want to #1 to happen. 1 & 2
> are incompatible on the same branch, but their competition is keeping
> 3 and 4 at bay.
>
> That doesn't mean we shouldn't change, but you can only pull in so
> many directions without things coming apart.
>
> --David
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org> wrote:
> that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
>
> It feels like as a community we are running away from making any changes to
> the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never act on
> it.
I don't think we are running away from them. I certainly hope not.
There are competing demands (like everything)
1. We want to ship 4.5
2. We want to have new features being developed
3. We want to fix quality issues
4. We want to fix process issues
Each of those is at odds with each other. They are also hard problems,
and frankly most of them are as much a cultural problem as a technical
problem.
>
> What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right? or
> are we just shying away from any change?
>
We are saying that #2 forced us to fork 4.5 into a different branch.
Master and 4.5 are now diverging, and we want to #1 to happen. 1 & 2
are incompatible on the same branch, but their competition is keeping
3 and 4 at bay.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't change, but you can only pull in so
many directions without things coming apart.
--David
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Posted by Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>.
as Travis is happy and some of my tests went fine, I pushed the merge.
~Rajani
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org> wrote:
> Travis is happy with the merge. Can I push this?
>
> ~Rajani
>
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I did merge -s ours and somehow didnt see any issue. (
>> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/36)
>> will wait for the Travis report (
>> https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/builds/40033174)
>>
>> I havent used -X before. But, from the documentation I understood it as,
>> the merge strategy will be applied only when doing a conflict resolution.
>> If my understanding is right, we shouldnt be using -X.
>>
>> ~Rajani
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Id did do -s ours:) but if we don't merge -s ... -X ours it doesn't help.
>>>
>>> mobile dev with bilingual spelling checker used (read at your own risk)
>>> Op 3 nov. 2014 05:40 schreef "Rajani Karuturi" <ra...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>> > that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
>>> >
>>> > It feels like as a community we are running away from making any
>>> changes to
>>> > the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never
>>> act on
>>> > it.
>>> >
>>> > What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right?
>>> or
>>> > are we just shying away from any change?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ~Rajani
>>> >
>>> > PS: We could still do a blank merge(-s ours) from 4.5 to master and
>>> > continue.
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:06 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Rajani Karuturi <rajani@apache.org
>>> >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > > > Can we atleast follow the merge part of it? ie) commit to 4.5 and
>>> then
>>> > > > merge 4.5 to master?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > merging wont be easy unless everybody agrees and does merge for
>>> their
>>> > > > commits.
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > > It won't work; master and 4.5 have both diverged, even if it's very
>>> > > small at this point.
>>> > > Daan and I both seemed to come to this conclusion last week:
>>> > >
>>> > > http://markmail.org/message/sumgmlo4avgjquym
>>> > > http://markmail.org/message/wazq4lz47v22mynz
>>> > >
>>> > > --David
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Posted by Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>.
Travis is happy with the merge. Can I push this?
~Rajani
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org> wrote:
> I did merge -s ours and somehow didnt see any issue. (
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/36)
> will wait for the Travis report (
> https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/builds/40033174)
>
> I havent used -X before. But, from the documentation I understood it as,
> the merge strategy will be applied only when doing a conflict resolution.
> If my understanding is right, we shouldnt be using -X.
>
> ~Rajani
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Id did do -s ours:) but if we don't merge -s ... -X ours it doesn't help.
>>
>> mobile dev with bilingual spelling checker used (read at your own risk)
>> Op 3 nov. 2014 05:40 schreef "Rajani Karuturi" <ra...@apache.org>:
>>
>> > that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
>> >
>> > It feels like as a community we are running away from making any
>> changes to
>> > the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never
>> act on
>> > it.
>> >
>> > What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right?
>> or
>> > are we just shying away from any change?
>> >
>> >
>> > ~Rajani
>> >
>> > PS: We could still do a blank merge(-s ours) from 4.5 to master and
>> > continue.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:06 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > Can we atleast follow the merge part of it? ie) commit to 4.5 and
>> then
>> > > > merge 4.5 to master?
>> > > >
>> > > > merging wont be easy unless everybody agrees and does merge for
>> their
>> > > > commits.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > It won't work; master and 4.5 have both diverged, even if it's very
>> > > small at this point.
>> > > Daan and I both seemed to come to this conclusion last week:
>> > >
>> > > http://markmail.org/message/sumgmlo4avgjquym
>> > > http://markmail.org/message/wazq4lz47v22mynz
>> > >
>> > > --David
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Posted by Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>.
I did merge -s ours and somehow didnt see any issue. (
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/36)
will wait for the Travis report (
https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/builds/40033174)
I havent used -X before. But, from the documentation I understood it as,
the merge strategy will be applied only when doing a conflict resolution.
If my understanding is right, we shouldnt be using -X.
~Rajani
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Id did do -s ours:) but if we don't merge -s ... -X ours it doesn't help.
>
> mobile dev with bilingual spelling checker used (read at your own risk)
> Op 3 nov. 2014 05:40 schreef "Rajani Karuturi" <ra...@apache.org>:
>
> > that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
> >
> > It feels like as a community we are running away from making any changes
> to
> > the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never act
> on
> > it.
> >
> > What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right? or
> > are we just shying away from any change?
> >
> >
> > ~Rajani
> >
> > PS: We could still do a blank merge(-s ours) from 4.5 to master and
> > continue.
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:06 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Can we atleast follow the merge part of it? ie) commit to 4.5 and
> then
> > > > merge 4.5 to master?
> > > >
> > > > merging wont be easy unless everybody agrees and does merge for their
> > > > commits.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It won't work; master and 4.5 have both diverged, even if it's very
> > > small at this point.
> > > Daan and I both seemed to come to this conclusion last week:
> > >
> > > http://markmail.org/message/sumgmlo4avgjquym
> > > http://markmail.org/message/wazq4lz47v22mynz
> > >
> > > --David
> > >
> >
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit
Posted by Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com>.
Id did do -s ours:) but if we don't merge -s ... -X ours it doesn't help.
mobile dev with bilingual spelling checker used (read at your own risk)
Op 3 nov. 2014 05:40 schreef "Rajani Karuturi" <ra...@apache.org>:
> that means, we postponed the git problems to 4.6. :(
>
> It feels like as a community we are running away from making any changes to
> the way we interact with git. We seem to discuss it a lot but, never act on
> it.
>
> What I don't understand is, are we saying the way we use git is right? or
> are we just shying away from any change?
>
>
> ~Rajani
>
> PS: We could still do a blank merge(-s ours) from 4.5 to master and
> continue.
>
> On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:06 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Rajani Karuturi <ra...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Can we atleast follow the merge part of it? ie) commit to 4.5 and then
> > > merge 4.5 to master?
> > >
> > > merging wont be easy unless everybody agrees and does merge for their
> > > commits.
> > >
> >
> > It won't work; master and 4.5 have both diverged, even if it's very
> > small at this point.
> > Daan and I both seemed to come to this conclusion last week:
> >
> > http://markmail.org/message/sumgmlo4avgjquym
> > http://markmail.org/message/wazq4lz47v22mynz
> >
> > --David
> >
>