You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mxnet.apache.org by Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> on 2018/10/02 12:42:11 UTC

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a clear idea
of the process and what the expected results will look like.

- I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
- @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and submitted
it to my repo
- I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.

Here is a gif of the process of merging: http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
Here is the result of the repo: https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet

Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.

If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the lead in
requesting the actions from INFRA?

It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)

Thanks,
Carin

<https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17>



On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
>
> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options for the
> web UI button: https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
>
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being stripped out
> > on email lists.
> >
> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep. 2018, 03:44:
> >
> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or enable
> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a different github
> > > project):
> > >
> > > [image: image.png]
> > >
> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid creating
> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical problem).
> But
> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could confirm.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Chiyuan
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be great.
> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will be out of
> > >> communication for a bit
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and not because
> of
> > >> some
> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out mentors to
> > >> create a
> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Marco
> > >> >
> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29. Sep. 2018,
> > >> 01:17:
> > >> >
> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of master. It
> seemed
> > >> to go
> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for everyone.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I think the
> > most
> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever way is the
> best
> > >> to
> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from the github
> > >> > > interface
> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe it is good
> to
> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using that.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing due to the
> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on *top* of
> > >> current
> > >> > > >    history
> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the project is not
> > >> linear
> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we would like to
> > have
> > >> for
> > >> > > > this
> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main repo and
> the
> > >> julia
> > >> > > > branch
> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to have two
> tails
> > >> with
> > >> > > > their
> > >> > > >    own history.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on the github
> > could
> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then pushing the
> > button
> > >> on
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Best,
> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in this case.
> I
> > >> > > > originally
> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the github web
> > >> interface,
> > >> > but
> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be done outside
> it
> > >> > because
> > >> > > > of
> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >> >
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using the subtree
> > and
> > >> > the
> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to be a
> simple,
> > >> > "click
> > >> > > > the
> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand this task
> > off
> > >> to
> > >> > > > > someone
> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there correctly.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to take this
> over?
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and then try
> merge
> > >> that
> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this contribution,
> > as
> > >> a
> > >> > > > general
> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list of commits
> is
> > >> big
> > >> > > and
> > >> > > > > you
> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is better so
> you
> > >> keep
> > >> > > > > history
> > >> > > > > >> and
> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on top of master
> > you
> > >> > are
> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be individually
> > >> > reverted
> > >> > > as
> > >> > > > > >> some
> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come from a
> > >> mercurial
> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to summarize the
> > >> > feedback
> > >> > > > > from
> > >> > > > > >> the
> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard for very good
> > >> > reasons.
> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia language
> from
> > >> its
> > >> > > > > sibling
> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual commits of
> > the
> > >> > many
> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple years to
> make
> > >> this
> > >> > a
> > >> > > > > great
> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge for it.
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using a tag. I
> > think
> > >> we
> > >> > > can
> > >> > > > > try
> > >> > > > > >> it
> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other ways to
> browse
> > >> the
> > >> > > > commit
> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can add the
> tag
> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR using the
> > above
> > >> > > method
> > >> > > > in
> > >> > > > > >> my
> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to having the Julia
> > >> > > community
> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration with them.
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for the
> > >> > aforementioned
> > >> > > > > issue,
> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit before the
> > merge,
> > >> so
> > >> > > that
> > >> > > > > in
> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo commits by
> > >> skipping
> > >> > > > this
> > >> > > > > >> big
> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer to take
> his
> > or
> > >> > her
> > >> > > > hand
> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and track the
> > >> > contributions.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron Markham <
> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the efforts of all
> of
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim it down
> from
> > >> 700+
> > >> > > > > commits
> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy <
> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1 individual, if we
> > squash
> > >> > merge
> > >> > > > > we'll
> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of those
> > individuals.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi Chen <
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase merge is that
> it
> > >> > > preserves
> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package contributors, and
> > given
> > >> > that
> > >> > > > the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has always been a
> > >> > > high-quality
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here to
> preserve
> > >> the
> > >> > > > commit
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the Julia binding
> and
> > >> > > welcome
> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi Chen <
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would suggest rebase
> and
> > >> > merge.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit log of the
> > Julia
> > >> > > > binding
> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there has been
> done
> > >> > > through
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the developer of
> > the
> > >> > > > effort.
> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the commits more
> > >> > easily.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin Meier <
> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some clarity of the
> > >> pros
> > >> > and
> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the right
> > decision.
> > >> I
> > >> > > think
> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I will take a
> stab
> > >> > below
> > >> > > at
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed any.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit for the
> > feature
> > >> > and
> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of master.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to do git log
> to
> > >> > browse
> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github would handle
> > >> squashing
> > >> > > all
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too much?
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity of the
> > features
> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit message
> with
> > >> one
> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the granularity of the
> > >> > individual
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project standard
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on top of
> master
> > >> that
> > >> > > > might
> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right before. (like
> > someone
> > >> > > > browsing
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of the two
> > >> > approaches?
> > >> > > Is
> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g. preserving
> the
> > >> > history
> > >> > > > of
> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical issue (e.g.
> > >> using
> > >> > > > squash
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that might be
> > >> difficult
> > >> > or
> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely that someone
> > is
> > >> > going
> > >> > > > to
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But preserving the
> > >> commit
> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the change or
> > >> bisect
> > >> > for
> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR actually
> > >> contains
> > >> > > 700+
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development of the Julia
> > >> > binding
> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started with a separate
> > >> repo
> > >> > due
> > >> > > > to
> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of julia.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin Meier <
> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > >> > ),
> > >> > > is
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of the large
> > number
> > >> of
> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual "Squash and
> > Merge".
> > >> > The
> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging with a
> merge
> > >> > commit
> > >> > > is
> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits from this
> branch
> > >> will
> > >> > > be
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all the commit
> > >> > messages
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from this
> branch
> > >> will
> > >> > > be
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github won't show
> > all
> > >> of
> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle the merge?
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Marco de Abreu <ma...@googlemail.com.INVALID>.
You won't be able to push to master. The commit will be declined
automatically, so command line is not an option.

-Marco

Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 5. Okt. 2018, 01:29:

> Micheal,
>
> Thanks for catching up and helping us with this.
> I do see the "view command line instructions". I just assumed that master
> was a protected branch and I would not be able to push to it.
> Honestly, I'm a bit scared if it isn't :)
>
> What do you suggest? Should I try to merge and push to master?
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:19 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit as you
> > have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an option?  Do
> > you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash and
> > merge button?
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you Mike!
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Carin,
> > > >
> > > > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking everything,
> so I
> > > > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.
> Then I
> > > am
> > > > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all
> our
> > > > Infra
> > > > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list discussion
> > in
> > > > > JIRA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this process
> to
> > > get
> > > > > the PR merged?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Carin
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a
> > clear
> > > > idea
> > > > > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and
> > > > submitted
> > > > > > it to my repo
> > > > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the
> lead
> > in
> > > > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <
> > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > >> web UI button:
> > > > > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being
> > > > stripped
> > > > > >> out
> > > > > >> > on email lists.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep.
> > 2018,
> > > > > 03:44:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or
> > > enable
> > > > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a
> different
> > > > github
> > > > > >> > > project):
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid
> > > creating
> > > > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical
> > > > > problem).
> > > > > >> But
> > > > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could
> > > confirm.
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > Best,
> > > > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> > > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be
> > > great.
> > > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will
> be
> > > out
> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and
> not
> > > > > >> because of
> > > > > >> > >> some
> > > > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out
> > > mentors
> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > >> create a
> > > > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29.
> > Sep.
> > > > > 2018,
> > > > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of
> master.
> > > It
> > > > > >> seemed
> > > > > >> > >> to go
> > > > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for
> > > > everyone.
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I
> > > think
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > most
> > > > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever
> way
> > is
> > > > the
> > > > > >> best
> > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> > > > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from
> > the
> > > > > >> github
> > > > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe
> it
> > is
> > > > > good
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using
> that.
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing
> due
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on
> > > *top*
> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> current
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the
> > project
> > > is
> > > > > not
> > > > > >> > >> linear
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we
> would
> > > like
> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > have
> > > > > >> > >> for
> > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main
> > repo
> > > > and
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> julia
> > > > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to
> have
> > > two
> > > > > >> tails
> > > > > >> > >> with
> > > > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on
> the
> > > > github
> > > > > >> > could
> > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then
> > pushing
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > button
> > > > > >> > >> on
> > > > > >> > >> > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in
> > this
> > > > > >> case. I
> > > > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the
> github
> > > web
> > > > > >> > >> interface,
> > > > > >> > >> > but
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be
> done
> > > > > outside
> > > > > >> it
> > > > > >> > >> > because
> > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using
> > the
> > > > > >> subtree
> > > > > >> > and
> > > > > >> > >> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to
> > be a
> > > > > >> simple,
> > > > > >> > >> > "click
> > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand
> > > this
> > > > > task
> > > > > >> > off
> > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there
> > > > > >> correctly.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to
> take
> > > > this
> > > > > >> over?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> > > > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and
> > then
> > > > try
> > > > > >> merge
> > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
> > > > > >> contribution,
> > > > > >> > as
> > > > > >> > >> a
> > > > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list
> of
> > > > > >> commits is
> > > > > >> > >> big
> > > > > >> > >> > > and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is
> > > better
> > > > so
> > > > > >> you
> > > > > >> > >> keep
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on
> top
> > of
> > > > > >> master
> > > > > >> > you
> > > > > >> > >> > are
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be
> > > > > individually
> > > > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > > > >> > >> > > as
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come
> > > from
> > > > a
> > > > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to
> > > > summarize
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard
> for
> > > very
> > > > > >> good
> > > > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia
> > > > language
> > > > > >> from
> > > > > >> > >> its
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual
> > > > commits
> > > > > of
> > > > > >> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > many
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple
> > years
> > > > to
> > > > > >> make
> > > > > >> > >> this
> > > > > >> > >> > a
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge
> for
> > > it.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using
> a
> > > > tag. I
> > > > > >> > think
> > > > > >> > >> we
> > > > > >> > >> > > can
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other
> ways
> > > to
> > > > > >> browse
> > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can
> > add
> > > > the
> > > > > >> tag
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR
> > using
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > above
> > > > > >> > >> > > method
> > > > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to
> having
> > > the
> > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > >> > >> > > community
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration
> with
> > > > them.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan
> Zhang
> > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for
> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit
> > before
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > merge,
> > > > > >> > >> so
> > > > > >> > >> > > that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo
> > > commits
> > > > > by
> > > > > >> > >> skipping
> > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer
> > to
> > > > take
> > > > > >> his
> > > > > >> > or
> > > > > >> > >> > her
> > > > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
> > > > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and
> track
> > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron
> > Markham
> > > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the
> efforts
> > > of
> > > > > all
> > > > > >> of
> > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim
> > it
> > > > down
> > > > > >> from
> > > > > >> > >> 700+
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy
> <
> > > > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1
> individual,
> > if
> > > > we
> > > > > >> > squash
> > > > > >> > >> > merge
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of
> those
> > > > > >> > individuals.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi
> > > Chen <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase
> merge
> > is
> > > > > that
> > > > > >> it
> > > > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> > > contributors,
> > > > > and
> > > > > >> > given
> > > > > >> > >> > that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has
> always
> > > > been
> > > > > a
> > > > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here
> > to
> > > > > >> preserve
> > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the
> Julia
> > > > > binding
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi
> > Chen
> > > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would
> suggest
> > > > rebase
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit
> log
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > Julia
> > > > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there
> > has
> > > > been
> > > > > >> done
> > > > > >> > >> > > through
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the
> > > > developer
> > > > > >> of
> > > > > >> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the
> > > commits
> > > > > >> more
> > > > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin
> > > Meier <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some
> > clarity
> > > > of
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> pros
> > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the
> > right
> > > > > >> > decision.
> > > > > >> > >> I
> > > > > >> > >> > > think
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I
> will
> > > > take a
> > > > > >> stab
> > > > > >> > >> > below
> > > > > >> > >> > > at
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I
> missed
> > > > any.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > feature
> > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of
> > master.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to
> do
> > > git
> > > > > log
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > browse
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github
> would
> > > > handle
> > > > > >> > >> squashing
> > > > > >> > >> > > all
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too
> much?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity
> of
> > > the
> > > > > >> > features
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit
> > > > message
> > > > > >> with
> > > > > >> > >> one
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the
> granularity
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > individual
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project
> standard
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on
> top
> > > of
> > > > > >> master
> > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right
> before.
> > > > (like
> > > > > >> > someone
> > > > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM
> Chiyuan
> > > > Zhang
> > > > > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of
> > the
> > > > two
> > > > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g.
> > > > preserving
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical
> > issue
> > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > >> > >> using
> > > > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that
> > might
> > > be
> > > > > >> > >> difficult
> > > > > >> > >> > or
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely
> > that
> > > > > >> someone
> > > > > >> > is
> > > > > >> > >> > going
> > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> > > preserving
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the
> > > change
> > > > > or
> > > > > >> > >> bisect
> > > > > >> > >> > for
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR
> > > > actually
> > > > > >> > >> contains
> > > > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development
> of
> > > the
> > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > >> > >> > binding
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started
> with a
> > > > > >> separate
> > > > > >> > >> repo
> > > > > >> > >> > due
> > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of
> > > julia.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin
> > > > Meier <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > > > >> > >> > ),
> > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of
> the
> > > > large
> > > > > >> > number
> > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual
> > "Squash
> > > > and
> > > > > >> > Merge".
> > > > > >> > >> > The
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging
> > > with a
> > > > > >> merge
> > > > > >> > >> > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits
> from
> > > this
> > > > > >> branch
> > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all
> > the
> > > > > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > messages
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits
> from
> > > this
> > > > > >> branch
> > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github
> > > won't
> > > > > show
> > > > > >> > all
> > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle
> > the
> > > > > merge?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Pedro Larroy <pe...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for the efforts, looks like you guys achieved a good solution,
congratulations for the merge to everyone involved.

Pedro.



On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:47 PM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Micheal,
>
> Thanks. You were right! I could merge.
>
> The PR shows up now as merged
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> My merge commit is here
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/master
>
> Thanks again for the help.
>
> - Carin
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:09 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would try the merge locally and then inspect the result closely to make
> > sure it looks like what you want.  If it looks good, you could try
> pushing
> > to master.  If you can't push, then we know but I "think" protected just
> > means you can't force push in this case based on
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15233 which links to
> > https://home.apache.org/~pono/mxnet.png.  Maybe I have only tried that
> > with
> > repo that own though.
> >
> > I did find at least one ticket where a team asked for merge commits to be
> > enabled, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16690.  But I think
> > they intend for it to stay that way.  Is that what the community would
> want
> > for the MXNet repo?  Or would you want to enable it for this and disable
> it
> > again?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:29 PM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Micheal,
> > >
> > > Thanks for catching up and helping us with this.
> > > I do see the "view command line instructions". I just assumed that
> master
> > > was a protected branch and I would not be able to push to it.
> > > Honestly, I'm a bit scared if it isn't :)
> > >
> > > What do you suggest? Should I try to merge and push to master?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:19 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit as
> > you
> > > > have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an option?
> > Do
> > > > you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash
> and
> > > > merge button?
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thank you Mike!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Carin,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking
> everything,
> > > so I
> > > > > > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.
> > > Then I
> > > > > am
> > > > > > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mike
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <carinmeier@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route
> all
> > > our
> > > > > > Infra
> > > > > > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list
> > discussion
> > > > in
> > > > > > > JIRA.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this
> > process
> > > to
> > > > > get
> > > > > > > the PR merged?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <
> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone
> a
> > > > clear
> > > > > > idea
> > > > > > > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > > > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR
> and
> > > > > > submitted
> > > > > > > > it to my repo
> > > > > > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web
> > interface.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > > > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > > > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the
> > > lead
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge
> > options
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> web UI button:
> > > > > > > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is
> being
> > > > > > stripped
> > > > > > > >> out
> > > > > > > >> > on email lists.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30.
> Sep.
> > > > 2018,
> > > > > > > 03:44:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable
> or
> > > > > enable
> > > > > > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a
> > > different
> > > > > > github
> > > > > > > >> > > project):
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to
> avoid
> > > > > creating
> > > > > > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to
> > technical
> > > > > > > problem).
> > > > > > > >> But
> > > > > > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone
> could
> > > > > confirm.
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > Best,
> > > > > > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> > > > > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would
> be
> > > > > great.
> > > > > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I
> will
> > > be
> > > > > out
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions
> and
> > > not
> > > > > > > >> because of
> > > > > > > >> > >> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask
> out
> > > > > mentors
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > >> create a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa.,
> 29.
> > > > Sep.
> > > > > > > 2018,
> > > > > > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of
> > > master.
> > > > > It
> > > > > > > >> seemed
> > > > > > > >> > >> to go
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like
> for
> > > > > > everyone.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge
> button.
> > I
> > > > > think
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > most
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so
> whatever
> > > way
> > > > is
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> best
> > > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good
> option?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > > > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> github
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said,
> maybe
> > > it
> > > > is
> > > > > > > good
> > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using
> > > that.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than
> rebasing
> > > due
> > > > to
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently
> having
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history
> > on
> > > > > *top*
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> current
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the
> > > > project
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > >> > >> linear
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we
> > > would
> > > > > like
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > have
> > > > > > > >> > >> for
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the
> > main
> > > > repo
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense
> to
> > > have
> > > > > two
> > > > > > > >> tails
> > > > > > > >> > >> with
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission
> on
> > > the
> > > > > > github
> > > > > > > >> > could
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then
> > > > pushing
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > button
> > > > > > > >> > >> on
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer
> > in
> > > > this
> > > > > > > >> case. I
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the
> > > github
> > > > > web
> > > > > > > >> > >> interface,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > but
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be
> > > done
> > > > > > > outside
> > > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > because
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with
> > using
> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> subtree
> > > > > > > >> > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going
> > to
> > > > be a
> > > > > > > >> simple,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > "click
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather
> > hand
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > task
> > > > > > > >> > off
> > > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in
> > there
> > > > > > > >> correctly.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing
> to
> > > take
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > >> over?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy
> <
> > > > > > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch
> and
> > > > then
> > > > > > try
> > > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy
> <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of
> this
> > > > > > > >> contribution,
> > > > > > > >> > as
> > > > > > > >> > >> a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the
> > list
> > > of
> > > > > > > >> commits is
> > > > > > > >> > >> big
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging
> is
> > > > > better
> > > > > > so
> > > > > > > >> you
> > > > > > > >> > >> keep
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits
> on
> > > top
> > > > of
> > > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > > >> > you
> > > > > > > >> > >> > are
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't
> be
> > > > > > > individually
> > > > > > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > as
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I
> > come
> > > > > from
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either
> > to:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin
> > Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try
> to
> > > > > > summarize
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project
> standard
> > > for
> > > > > very
> > > > > > > >> good
> > > > > > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the
> > Julia
> > > > > > language
> > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > >> > >> its
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the
> > individual
> > > > > > commits
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > many
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over
> multiple
> > > > years
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> make
> > > > > > > >> > >> this
> > > > > > > >> > >> > a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use
> Rebase-Merge
> > > for
> > > > > it.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of
> > using
> > > a
> > > > > > tag. I
> > > > > > > >> > think
> > > > > > > >> > >> we
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > can
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are
> other
> > > ways
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> browse
> > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we
> > can
> > > > add
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> tag
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the
> PR
> > > > using
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > above
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > method
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to
> > > having
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > community
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our
> collaboration
> > > with
> > > > > > them.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan
> > > Zhang
> > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit
> > > > before
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > merge,
> > > > > > > >> > >> so
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent
> main-repo
> > > > > commits
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > >> > >> skipping
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a
> > pointer
> > > > to
> > > > > > take
> > > > > > > >> his
> > > > > > > >> > or
> > > > > > > >> > >> > her
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason
> > Dai <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and
> > > track
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron
> > > > Markham
> > > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the
> > > efforts
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can
> > trim
> > > > it
> > > > > > down
> > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > >> > >> 700+
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen
> > Swamy
> > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1
> > > individual,
> > > > if
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > >> > squash
> > > > > > > >> > >> > merge
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of
> > > those
> > > > > > > >> > individuals.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve
> history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM,
> > Tianqi
> > > > > Chen <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase
> > > merge
> > > > is
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> > > > > contributors,
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> > given
> > > > > > > >> > >> > that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has
> > > always
> > > > > > been
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception
> > here
> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> preserve
> > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the
> > > Julia
> > > > > > > binding
> > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM
> Tianqi
> > > > Chen
> > > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would
> > > suggest
> > > > > > rebase
> > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the
> commit
> > > log
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > Julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit
> > there
> > > > has
> > > > > > been
> > > > > > > >> done
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > through
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect
> the
> > > > > > developer
> > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of
> the
> > > > > commits
> > > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM
> Carin
> > > > > Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some
> > > > clarity
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> pros
> > > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to
> the
> > > > right
> > > > > > > >> > decision.
> > > > > > > >> > >> I
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > think
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I
> > > will
> > > > > > take a
> > > > > > > >> stab
> > > > > > > >> > >> > below
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > at
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I
> > > missed
> > > > > > any.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project
> standard
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one
> > commit
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > feature
> > > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of
> > > > master.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user
> to
> > > do
> > > > > git
> > > > > > > log
> > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > browse
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github
> > > would
> > > > > > handle
> > > > > > > >> > >> squashing
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > all
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too
> > > much?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the
> > granularity
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > features
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge
> > commit
> > > > > > message
> > > > > > > >> with
> > > > > > > >> > >> one
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the
> > > granularity
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > individual
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project
> > > standard
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits
> on
> > > top
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right
> > > before.
> > > > > > (like
> > > > > > > >> > someone
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM
> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > Zhang
> > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > two
> > > > > > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics
> (e.g.
> > > > > > preserving
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or
> technical
> > > > issue
> > > > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > > >> > >> using
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message
> that
> > > > might
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > >> > >> difficult
> > > > > > > >> > >> > or
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very
> likely
> > > > that
> > > > > > > >> someone
> > > > > > > >> > is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > going
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> > > > > preserving
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace
> > the
> > > > > change
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > >> > >> bisect
> > > > > > > >> > >> > for
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the
> > PR
> > > > > > actually
> > > > > > > >> > >> contains
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The
> development
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > binding
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started
> > > with a
> > > > > > > >> separate
> > > > > > > >> > >> repo
> > > > > > > >> > >> > due
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system
> > of
> > > > > julia.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM
> > Carin
> > > > > > Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > > > > > >> > >> > ),
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > large
> > > > > > > >> > number
> > > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual
> > > > "Squash
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> > Merge".
> > > > > > > >> > >> > The
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since
> > merging
> > > > > with a
> > > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > > >> > >> > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits
> > > from
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With
> > all
> > > > the
> > > > > > > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > messages
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits
> > > from
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits
> > (Github
> > > > > won't
> > > > > > > show
> > > > > > > >> > all
> > > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should
> > handle
> > > > the
> > > > > > > merge?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org>.
Great, glad it worked.  I learned something too.

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 22:09 Marco de Abreu
<ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:

> Oh nice, great catch Michael and Carin! I just learned something new,
> thanks :)
>
> I guess we're all set then, right? Thanks a lot, everyone!
>
> -Marco
>
> Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 5. Okt. 2018, 02:47:
>
> > Micheal,
> >
> > Thanks. You were right! I could merge.
> >
> > The PR shows up now as merged
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > My merge commit is here
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/master
> >
> > Thanks again for the help.
> >
> > - Carin
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:09 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I would try the merge locally and then inspect the result closely to
> make
> > > sure it looks like what you want.  If it looks good, you could try
> > pushing
> > > to master.  If you can't push, then we know but I "think" protected
> just
> > > means you can't force push in this case based on
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15233 which links to
> > > https://home.apache.org/~pono/mxnet.png.  Maybe I have only tried that
> > > with
> > > repo that own though.
> > >
> > > I did find at least one ticket where a team asked for merge commits to
> be
> > > enabled, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16690.  But I
> think
> > > they intend for it to stay that way.  Is that what the community would
> > want
> > > for the MXNet repo?  Or would you want to enable it for this and
> disable
> > it
> > > again?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:29 PM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Micheal,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for catching up and helping us with this.
> > > > I do see the "view command line instructions". I just assumed that
> > master
> > > > was a protected branch and I would not be able to push to it.
> > > > Honestly, I'm a bit scared if it isn't :)
> > > >
> > > > What do you suggest? Should I try to merge and push to master?
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:19 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit
> as
> > > you
> > > > > have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an
> option?
> > > Do
> > > > > you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash
> > and
> > > > > merge button?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you Mike!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Carin,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking
> > everything,
> > > > so I
> > > > > > > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.
> > > > Then I
> > > > > > am
> > > > > > > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mike
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <
> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route
> > all
> > > > our
> > > > > > > Infra
> > > > > > > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list
> > > discussion
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > JIRA.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this
> > > process
> > > > to
> > > > > > get
> > > > > > > > the PR merged?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <
> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give
> everyone
> > a
> > > > > clear
> > > > > > > idea
> > > > > > > > > of the process and what the expected results will look
> like.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > > > > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR
> > and
> > > > > > > submitted
> > > > > > > > > it to my repo
> > > > > > > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web
> > > interface.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > > > > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > > > > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks
> ok.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take
> the
> > > > lead
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > <
> > > > >
> https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge
> > > options
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> web UI button:
> > > > > > > > >>
> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is
> > being
> > > > > > > stripped
> > > > > > > > >> out
> > > > > > > > >> > on email lists.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30.
> > Sep.
> > > > > 2018,
> > > > > > > > 03:44:
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to
> disable
> > or
> > > > > > enable
> > > > > > > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a
> > > > different
> > > > > > > github
> > > > > > > > >> > > project):
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to
> > avoid
> > > > > > creating
> > > > > > > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to
> > > technical
> > > > > > > > problem).
> > > > > > > > >> But
> > > > > > > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone
> > could
> > > > > > confirm.
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > Best,
> > > > > > > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it
> would
> > be
> > > > > > great.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > > out
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions
> > and
> > > > not
> > > > > > > > >> because of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> some
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask
> > out
> > > > > > mentors
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> create a
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa.,
> > 29.
> > > > > Sep.
> > > > > > > > 2018,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of
> > > > master.
> > > > > > It
> > > > > > > > >> seemed
> > > > > > > > >> > >> to go
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like
> > for
> > > > > > > everyone.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge
> > button.
> > > I
> > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > most
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so
> > whatever
> > > > way
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> best
> > > > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good
> > option?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > > > > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit
> option
> > > from
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> github
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said,
> > maybe
> > > > it
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > good
> > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge
> using
> > > > that.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than
> > rebasing
> > > > due
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently
> > having
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit
> history
> > > on
> > > > > > *top*
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> current
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of
> the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > >> > >> linear
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what
> we
> > > > would
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > have
> > > > > > > > >> > >> for
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the
> > > main
> > > > > repo
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> julia
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense
> > to
> > > > have
> > > > > > two
> > > > > > > > >> tails
> > > > > > > > >> > >> with
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > > > github
> > > > > > > > >> > could
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option,
> then
> > > > > pushing
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > button
> > > > > > > > >> > >> on
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better
> answer
> > > in
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > > >> case. I
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the
> > > > github
> > > > > > web
> > > > > > > > >> > >> interface,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > but
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to
> be
> > > > done
> > > > > > > > outside
> > > > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > because
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better
> fit.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with
> > > using
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> subtree
> > > > > > > > >> > and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not
> going
> > > to
> > > > > be a
> > > > > > > > >> simple,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > "click
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I
> rather
> > > hand
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > task
> > > > > > > > >> > off
> > > > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in
> > > there
> > > > > > > > >> correctly.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing
> > to
> > > > take
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > >> over?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen
> Swamy
> > <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch
> > and
> > > > > then
> > > > > > > try
> > > > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro
> Larroy
> > <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of
> > this
> > > > > > > > >> contribution,
> > > > > > > > >> > as
> > > > > > > > >> > >> a
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the
> > > list
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> commits is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> big
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually
> merging
> > is
> > > > > > better
> > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > > >> you
> > > > > > > > >> > >> keep
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits
> > on
> > > > top
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > > > >> > you
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > are
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't
> > be
> > > > > > > > individually
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > as
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because
> I
> > > come
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be
> either
> > > to:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or
> squashing.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin
> > > Meier <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try
> > to
> > > > > > > summarize
> > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project
> > standard
> > > > for
> > > > > > very
> > > > > > > > >> good
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the
> > > Julia
> > > > > > > language
> > > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > > >> > >> its
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the
> > > individual
> > > > > > > commits
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > many
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over
> > multiple
> > > > > years
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> make
> > > > > > > > >> > >> this
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > a
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use
> > Rebase-Merge
> > > > for
> > > > > > it.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of
> > > using
> > > > a
> > > > > > > tag. I
> > > > > > > > >> > think
> > > > > > > > >> > >> we
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > can
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are
> > other
> > > > ways
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> browse
> > > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But,
> we
> > > can
> > > > > add
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> tag
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge
> the
> > PR
> > > > > using
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > above
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > method
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to
> > > > having
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > community
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our
> > collaboration
> > > > with
> > > > > > > them.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM
> Chiyuan
> > > > Zhang
> > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a
> workaround
> > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the
> commit
> > > > > before
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > merge,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> so
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > that
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent
> > main-repo
> > > > > > commits
> > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > >> > >> skipping
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a
> > > pointer
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > take
> > > > > > > > >> his
> > > > > > > > >> > or
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > her
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason
> > > Dai <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve
> and
> > > > track
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM
> Aaron
> > > > > Markham
> > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the
> > > > efforts
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that
> can
> > > trim
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > down
> > > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > > >> > >> 700+
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen
> > > Swamy
> > > > <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1
> > > > individual,
> > > > > if
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > >> > squash
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > merge
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution
> of
> > > > those
> > > > > > > > >> > individuals.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve
> > history
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM,
> > > Tianqi
> > > > > > Chen <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a
> rebase
> > > > merge
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> > > > > > contributors,
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> > given
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > that
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and
> has
> > > > always
> > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an
> exception
> > > here
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> preserve
> > > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to
> the
> > > > Julia
> > > > > > > > binding
> > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM
> > Tianqi
> > > > > Chen
> > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would
> > > > suggest
> > > > > > > rebase
> > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the
> > commit
> > > > log
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > Julia
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit
> > > there
> > > > > has
> > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > >> done
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > through
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect
> > the
> > > > > > > developer
> > > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of
> > the
> > > > > > commits
> > > > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM
> > Carin
> > > > > > Meier <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find
> some
> > > > > clarity
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> pros
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to
> > the
> > > > > right
> > > > > > > > >> > decision.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> I
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > think
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you
> listed. I
> > > > will
> > > > > > > take a
> > > > > > > > >> stab
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > below
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > at
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if
> I
> > > > missed
> > > > > > > any.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project
> > standard
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one
> > > commit
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > feature
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top
> of
> > > > > master.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a
> user
> > to
> > > > do
> > > > > > git
> > > > > > > > log
> > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > browse
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how
> github
> > > > would
> > > > > > > handle
> > > > > > > > >> > >> squashing
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > all
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be
> too
> > > > much?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the
> > > granularity
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > features
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge
> > > commit
> > > > > > > message
> > > > > > > > >> with
> > > > > > > > >> > >> one
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the
> > > > granularity
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > individual
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project
> > > > standard
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+
> commits
> > on
> > > > top
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right
> > > > before.
> > > > > > > (like
> > > > > > > > >> > someone
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM
> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > > Zhang
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and
> cons
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > two
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics
> > (e.g.
> > > > > > > preserving
> > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > history
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or
> > technical
> > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> using
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message
> > that
> > > > > might
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > >> > >> difficult
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > or
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very
> > likely
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > >> someone
> > > > > > > > >> > is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > going
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> > > > > > preserving
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to
> trace
> > > the
> > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > >> > >> bisect
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > for
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context:
> the
> > > PR
> > > > > > > actually
> > > > > > > > >> > >> contains
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The
> > development
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > binding
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We
> started
> > > > with a
> > > > > > > > >> separate
> > > > > > > > >> > >> repo
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > due
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package
> system
> > > of
> > > > > > julia.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM
> > > Carin
> > > > > > > Meier <
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > ),
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > large
> > > > > > > > >> > number
> > > > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the
> usual
> > > > > "Squash
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> > Merge".
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > The
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since
> > > merging
> > > > > > with a
> > > > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The
> commits
> > > > from
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch
> (With
> > > all
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > commit
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > messages
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The
> commits
> > > > from
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits
> > > (Github
> > > > > > won't
> > > > > > > > show
> > > > > > > > >> > all
> > > > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should
> > > handle
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > merge?
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Marco de Abreu <ma...@googlemail.com.INVALID>.
Oh nice, great catch Michael and Carin! I just learned something new,
thanks :)

I guess we're all set then, right? Thanks a lot, everyone!

-Marco

Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 5. Okt. 2018, 02:47:

> Micheal,
>
> Thanks. You were right! I could merge.
>
> The PR shows up now as merged
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> My merge commit is here
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/master
>
> Thanks again for the help.
>
> - Carin
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:09 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would try the merge locally and then inspect the result closely to make
> > sure it looks like what you want.  If it looks good, you could try
> pushing
> > to master.  If you can't push, then we know but I "think" protected just
> > means you can't force push in this case based on
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15233 which links to
> > https://home.apache.org/~pono/mxnet.png.  Maybe I have only tried that
> > with
> > repo that own though.
> >
> > I did find at least one ticket where a team asked for merge commits to be
> > enabled, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16690.  But I think
> > they intend for it to stay that way.  Is that what the community would
> want
> > for the MXNet repo?  Or would you want to enable it for this and disable
> it
> > again?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:29 PM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Micheal,
> > >
> > > Thanks for catching up and helping us with this.
> > > I do see the "view command line instructions". I just assumed that
> master
> > > was a protected branch and I would not be able to push to it.
> > > Honestly, I'm a bit scared if it isn't :)
> > >
> > > What do you suggest? Should I try to merge and push to master?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:19 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit as
> > you
> > > > have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an option?
> > Do
> > > > you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash
> and
> > > > merge button?
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thank you Mike!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Carin,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking
> everything,
> > > so I
> > > > > > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.
> > > Then I
> > > > > am
> > > > > > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mike
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <carinmeier@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route
> all
> > > our
> > > > > > Infra
> > > > > > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list
> > discussion
> > > > in
> > > > > > > JIRA.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this
> > process
> > > to
> > > > > get
> > > > > > > the PR merged?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <
> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone
> a
> > > > clear
> > > > > > idea
> > > > > > > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > > > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR
> and
> > > > > > submitted
> > > > > > > > it to my repo
> > > > > > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web
> > interface.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > > > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > > > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the
> > > lead
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge
> > options
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> web UI button:
> > > > > > > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is
> being
> > > > > > stripped
> > > > > > > >> out
> > > > > > > >> > on email lists.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30.
> Sep.
> > > > 2018,
> > > > > > > 03:44:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable
> or
> > > > > enable
> > > > > > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a
> > > different
> > > > > > github
> > > > > > > >> > > project):
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to
> avoid
> > > > > creating
> > > > > > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to
> > technical
> > > > > > > problem).
> > > > > > > >> But
> > > > > > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone
> could
> > > > > confirm.
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > Best,
> > > > > > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> > > > > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would
> be
> > > > > great.
> > > > > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I
> will
> > > be
> > > > > out
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions
> and
> > > not
> > > > > > > >> because of
> > > > > > > >> > >> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask
> out
> > > > > mentors
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > >> create a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa.,
> 29.
> > > > Sep.
> > > > > > > 2018,
> > > > > > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of
> > > master.
> > > > > It
> > > > > > > >> seemed
> > > > > > > >> > >> to go
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like
> for
> > > > > > everyone.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge
> button.
> > I
> > > > > think
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > most
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so
> whatever
> > > way
> > > > is
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> best
> > > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good
> option?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > > > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> github
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said,
> maybe
> > > it
> > > > is
> > > > > > > good
> > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using
> > > that.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than
> rebasing
> > > due
> > > > to
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently
> having
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history
> > on
> > > > > *top*
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> current
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the
> > > > project
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > >> > >> linear
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we
> > > would
> > > > > like
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > have
> > > > > > > >> > >> for
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the
> > main
> > > > repo
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense
> to
> > > have
> > > > > two
> > > > > > > >> tails
> > > > > > > >> > >> with
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission
> on
> > > the
> > > > > > github
> > > > > > > >> > could
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then
> > > > pushing
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > button
> > > > > > > >> > >> on
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer
> > in
> > > > this
> > > > > > > >> case. I
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the
> > > github
> > > > > web
> > > > > > > >> > >> interface,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > but
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be
> > > done
> > > > > > > outside
> > > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > because
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with
> > using
> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> subtree
> > > > > > > >> > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going
> > to
> > > > be a
> > > > > > > >> simple,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > "click
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather
> > hand
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > task
> > > > > > > >> > off
> > > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in
> > there
> > > > > > > >> correctly.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing
> to
> > > take
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > >> over?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy
> <
> > > > > > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch
> and
> > > > then
> > > > > > try
> > > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy
> <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of
> this
> > > > > > > >> contribution,
> > > > > > > >> > as
> > > > > > > >> > >> a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the
> > list
> > > of
> > > > > > > >> commits is
> > > > > > > >> > >> big
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging
> is
> > > > > better
> > > > > > so
> > > > > > > >> you
> > > > > > > >> > >> keep
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits
> on
> > > top
> > > > of
> > > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > > >> > you
> > > > > > > >> > >> > are
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't
> be
> > > > > > > individually
> > > > > > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > as
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I
> > come
> > > > > from
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either
> > to:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin
> > Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try
> to
> > > > > > summarize
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project
> standard
> > > for
> > > > > very
> > > > > > > >> good
> > > > > > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the
> > Julia
> > > > > > language
> > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > >> > >> its
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the
> > individual
> > > > > > commits
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > many
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over
> multiple
> > > > years
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> make
> > > > > > > >> > >> this
> > > > > > > >> > >> > a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use
> Rebase-Merge
> > > for
> > > > > it.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of
> > using
> > > a
> > > > > > tag. I
> > > > > > > >> > think
> > > > > > > >> > >> we
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > can
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are
> other
> > > ways
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> browse
> > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we
> > can
> > > > add
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> tag
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the
> PR
> > > > using
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > above
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > method
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to
> > > having
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > community
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our
> collaboration
> > > with
> > > > > > them.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan
> > > Zhang
> > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit
> > > > before
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > merge,
> > > > > > > >> > >> so
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent
> main-repo
> > > > > commits
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > >> > >> skipping
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a
> > pointer
> > > > to
> > > > > > take
> > > > > > > >> his
> > > > > > > >> > or
> > > > > > > >> > >> > her
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason
> > Dai <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and
> > > track
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron
> > > > Markham
> > > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the
> > > efforts
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can
> > trim
> > > > it
> > > > > > down
> > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > >> > >> 700+
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen
> > Swamy
> > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1
> > > individual,
> > > > if
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > >> > squash
> > > > > > > >> > >> > merge
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of
> > > those
> > > > > > > >> > individuals.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve
> history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM,
> > Tianqi
> > > > > Chen <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase
> > > merge
> > > > is
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> > > > > contributors,
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> > given
> > > > > > > >> > >> > that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has
> > > always
> > > > > > been
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception
> > here
> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> preserve
> > > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the
> > > Julia
> > > > > > > binding
> > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM
> Tianqi
> > > > Chen
> > > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would
> > > suggest
> > > > > > rebase
> > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the
> commit
> > > log
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > Julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit
> > there
> > > > has
> > > > > > been
> > > > > > > >> done
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > through
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect
> the
> > > > > > developer
> > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of
> the
> > > > > commits
> > > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM
> Carin
> > > > > Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some
> > > > clarity
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> pros
> > > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to
> the
> > > > right
> > > > > > > >> > decision.
> > > > > > > >> > >> I
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > think
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I
> > > will
> > > > > > take a
> > > > > > > >> stab
> > > > > > > >> > >> > below
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > at
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I
> > > missed
> > > > > > any.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project
> standard
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one
> > commit
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > feature
> > > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of
> > > > master.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user
> to
> > > do
> > > > > git
> > > > > > > log
> > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > browse
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github
> > > would
> > > > > > handle
> > > > > > > >> > >> squashing
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > all
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too
> > > much?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the
> > granularity
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > features
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge
> > commit
> > > > > > message
> > > > > > > >> with
> > > > > > > >> > >> one
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the
> > > granularity
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > individual
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project
> > > standard
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits
> on
> > > top
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right
> > > before.
> > > > > > (like
> > > > > > > >> > someone
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM
> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > Zhang
> > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > two
> > > > > > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics
> (e.g.
> > > > > > preserving
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or
> technical
> > > > issue
> > > > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > > >> > >> using
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message
> that
> > > > might
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > >> > >> difficult
> > > > > > > >> > >> > or
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very
> likely
> > > > that
> > > > > > > >> someone
> > > > > > > >> > is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > going
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> > > > > preserving
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > >> commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace
> > the
> > > > > change
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > >> > >> bisect
> > > > > > > >> > >> > for
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the
> > PR
> > > > > > actually
> > > > > > > >> > >> contains
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The
> development
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > > >> > >> > binding
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started
> > > with a
> > > > > > > >> separate
> > > > > > > >> > >> repo
> > > > > > > >> > >> > due
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system
> > of
> > > > > julia.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM
> > Carin
> > > > > > Meier <
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > > > > > >> > >> > ),
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > large
> > > > > > > >> > number
> > > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual
> > > > "Squash
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> > Merge".
> > > > > > > >> > >> > The
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since
> > merging
> > > > > with a
> > > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > > >> > >> > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits
> > > from
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With
> > all
> > > > the
> > > > > > > commit
> > > > > > > >> > >> > messages
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits
> > > from
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits
> > (Github
> > > > > won't
> > > > > > > show
> > > > > > > >> > all
> > > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should
> > handle
> > > > the
> > > > > > > merge?
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>.
Micheal,

Thanks. You were right! I could merge.

The PR shows up now as merged
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
My merge commit is here
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/master

Thanks again for the help.

- Carin



On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:09 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I would try the merge locally and then inspect the result closely to make
> sure it looks like what you want.  If it looks good, you could try pushing
> to master.  If you can't push, then we know but I "think" protected just
> means you can't force push in this case based on
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15233 which links to
> https://home.apache.org/~pono/mxnet.png.  Maybe I have only tried that
> with
> repo that own though.
>
> I did find at least one ticket where a team asked for merge commits to be
> enabled, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16690.  But I think
> they intend for it to stay that way.  Is that what the community would want
> for the MXNet repo?  Or would you want to enable it for this and disable it
> again?
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:29 PM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Micheal,
> >
> > Thanks for catching up and helping us with this.
> > I do see the "view command line instructions". I just assumed that master
> > was a protected branch and I would not be able to push to it.
> > Honestly, I'm a bit scared if it isn't :)
> >
> > What do you suggest? Should I try to merge and push to master?
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:19 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit as
> you
> > > have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an option?
> Do
> > > you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash and
> > > merge button?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thank you Mike!
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Carin,
> > > > >
> > > > > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking everything,
> > so I
> > > > > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.
> > Then I
> > > > am
> > > > > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all
> > our
> > > > > Infra
> > > > > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list
> discussion
> > > in
> > > > > > JIRA.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this
> process
> > to
> > > > get
> > > > > > the PR merged?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <carinmeier@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a
> > > clear
> > > > > idea
> > > > > > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and
> > > > > submitted
> > > > > > > it to my repo
> > > > > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web
> interface.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the
> > lead
> > > in
> > > > > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <
> > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge
> options
> > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> web UI button:
> > > > > > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being
> > > > > stripped
> > > > > > >> out
> > > > > > >> > on email lists.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep.
> > > 2018,
> > > > > > 03:44:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or
> > > > enable
> > > > > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a
> > different
> > > > > github
> > > > > > >> > > project):
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid
> > > > creating
> > > > > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to
> technical
> > > > > > problem).
> > > > > > >> But
> > > > > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could
> > > > confirm.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Best,
> > > > > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> > > > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be
> > > > great.
> > > > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will
> > be
> > > > out
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and
> > not
> > > > > > >> because of
> > > > > > >> > >> some
> > > > > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out
> > > > mentors
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > >> > >> create a
> > > > > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29.
> > > Sep.
> > > > > > 2018,
> > > > > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of
> > master.
> > > > It
> > > > > > >> seemed
> > > > > > >> > >> to go
> > > > > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for
> > > > > everyone.
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button.
> I
> > > > think
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > most
> > > > > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever
> > way
> > > is
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> best
> > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> > > > > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option
> from
> > > the
> > > > > > >> github
> > > > > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe
> > it
> > > is
> > > > > > good
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using
> > that.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing
> > due
> > > to
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history
> on
> > > > *top*
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >> > >> current
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the
> > > project
> > > > is
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > >> > >> linear
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we
> > would
> > > > like
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > >> > have
> > > > > > >> > >> for
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the
> main
> > > repo
> > > > > and
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> julia
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to
> > have
> > > > two
> > > > > > >> tails
> > > > > > >> > >> with
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on
> > the
> > > > > github
> > > > > > >> > could
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then
> > > pushing
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > button
> > > > > > >> > >> on
> > > > > > >> > >> > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer
> in
> > > this
> > > > > > >> case. I
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the
> > github
> > > > web
> > > > > > >> > >> interface,
> > > > > > >> > >> > but
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be
> > done
> > > > > > outside
> > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > >> > >> > because
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with
> using
> > > the
> > > > > > >> subtree
> > > > > > >> > and
> > > > > > >> > >> > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going
> to
> > > be a
> > > > > > >> simple,
> > > > > > >> > >> > "click
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather
> hand
> > > > this
> > > > > > task
> > > > > > >> > off
> > > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in
> there
> > > > > > >> correctly.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to
> > take
> > > > > this
> > > > > > >> over?
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> > > > > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and
> > > then
> > > > > try
> > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
> > > > > > >> contribution,
> > > > > > >> > as
> > > > > > >> > >> a
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the
> list
> > of
> > > > > > >> commits is
> > > > > > >> > >> big
> > > > > > >> > >> > > and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is
> > > > better
> > > > > so
> > > > > > >> you
> > > > > > >> > >> keep
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on
> > top
> > > of
> > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > >> > you
> > > > > > >> > >> > are
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be
> > > > > > individually
> > > > > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > > > > >> > >> > > as
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I
> come
> > > > from
> > > > > a
> > > > > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either
> to:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin
> Meier <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to
> > > > > summarize
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard
> > for
> > > > very
> > > > > > >> good
> > > > > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the
> Julia
> > > > > language
> > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > >> > >> its
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the
> individual
> > > > > commits
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > many
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple
> > > years
> > > > > to
> > > > > > >> make
> > > > > > >> > >> this
> > > > > > >> > >> > a
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge
> > for
> > > > it.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of
> using
> > a
> > > > > tag. I
> > > > > > >> > think
> > > > > > >> > >> we
> > > > > > >> > >> > > can
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other
> > ways
> > > > to
> > > > > > >> browse
> > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we
> can
> > > add
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> tag
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR
> > > using
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > above
> > > > > > >> > >> > > method
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to
> > having
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > >> > >> > > community
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration
> > with
> > > > > them.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan
> > Zhang
> > > <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround
> for
> > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit
> > > before
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > merge,
> > > > > > >> > >> so
> > > > > > >> > >> > > that
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo
> > > > commits
> > > > > > by
> > > > > > >> > >> skipping
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a
> pointer
> > > to
> > > > > take
> > > > > > >> his
> > > > > > >> > or
> > > > > > >> > >> > her
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason
> Dai <
> > > > > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and
> > track
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron
> > > Markham
> > > > <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the
> > efforts
> > > > of
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can
> trim
> > > it
> > > > > down
> > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > >> > >> 700+
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen
> Swamy
> > <
> > > > > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1
> > individual,
> > > if
> > > > > we
> > > > > > >> > squash
> > > > > > >> > >> > merge
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of
> > those
> > > > > > >> > individuals.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM,
> Tianqi
> > > > Chen <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase
> > merge
> > > is
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > >> it
> > > > > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> > > > contributors,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> > given
> > > > > > >> > >> > that
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has
> > always
> > > > > been
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception
> here
> > > to
> > > > > > >> preserve
> > > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the
> > Julia
> > > > > > binding
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi
> > > Chen
> > > > <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would
> > suggest
> > > > > rebase
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit
> > log
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > Julia
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit
> there
> > > has
> > > > > been
> > > > > > >> done
> > > > > > >> > >> > > through
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the
> > > > > developer
> > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the
> > > > commits
> > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin
> > > > Meier <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some
> > > clarity
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> pros
> > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the
> > > right
> > > > > > >> > decision.
> > > > > > >> > >> I
> > > > > > >> > >> > > think
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I
> > will
> > > > > take a
> > > > > > >> stab
> > > > > > >> > >> > below
> > > > > > >> > >> > > at
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I
> > missed
> > > > > any.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one
> commit
> > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > feature
> > > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of
> > > master.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to
> > do
> > > > git
> > > > > > log
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> > >> > browse
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github
> > would
> > > > > handle
> > > > > > >> > >> squashing
> > > > > > >> > >> > > all
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too
> > much?
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the
> granularity
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> > features
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge
> commit
> > > > > message
> > > > > > >> with
> > > > > > >> > >> one
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the
> > granularity
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> > individual
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project
> > standard
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on
> > top
> > > > of
> > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right
> > before.
> > > > > (like
> > > > > > >> > someone
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM
> > Chiyuan
> > > > > Zhang
> > > > > > <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons
> of
> > > the
> > > > > two
> > > > > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > > > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g.
> > > > > preserving
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > history
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical
> > > issue
> > > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > >> > >> using
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that
> > > might
> > > > be
> > > > > > >> > >> difficult
> > > > > > >> > >> > or
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely
> > > that
> > > > > > >> someone
> > > > > > >> > is
> > > > > > >> > >> > going
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> > > > preserving
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > >> commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace
> the
> > > > change
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > >> > >> bisect
> > > > > > >> > >> > for
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the
> PR
> > > > > actually
> > > > > > >> > >> contains
> > > > > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > > >> > >> > binding
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started
> > with a
> > > > > > >> separate
> > > > > > >> > >> repo
> > > > > > >> > >> > due
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system
> of
> > > > julia.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM
> Carin
> > > > > Meier <
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > > > > >> > >> > ),
> > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of
> > the
> > > > > large
> > > > > > >> > number
> > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual
> > > "Squash
> > > > > and
> > > > > > >> > Merge".
> > > > > > >> > >> > The
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since
> merging
> > > > with a
> > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > >> > >> > commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits
> > from
> > > > this
> > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With
> all
> > > the
> > > > > > commit
> > > > > > >> > >> > messages
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits
> > from
> > > > this
> > > > > > >> branch
> > > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits
> (Github
> > > > won't
> > > > > > show
> > > > > > >> > all
> > > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should
> handle
> > > the
> > > > > > merge?
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com>.
I would try the merge locally and then inspect the result closely to make
sure it looks like what you want.  If it looks good, you could try pushing
to master.  If you can't push, then we know but I "think" protected just
means you can't force push in this case based on
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15233 which links to
https://home.apache.org/~pono/mxnet.png.  Maybe I have only tried that with
repo that own though.

I did find at least one ticket where a team asked for merge commits to be
enabled, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16690.  But I think
they intend for it to stay that way.  Is that what the community would want
for the MXNet repo?  Or would you want to enable it for this and disable it
again?


On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:29 PM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Micheal,
>
> Thanks for catching up and helping us with this.
> I do see the "view command line instructions". I just assumed that master
> was a protected branch and I would not be able to push to it.
> Honestly, I'm a bit scared if it isn't :)
>
> What do you suggest? Should I try to merge and push to master?
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:19 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit as you
> > have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an option?  Do
> > you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash and
> > merge button?
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you Mike!
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Carin,
> > > >
> > > > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking everything,
> so I
> > > > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.
> Then I
> > > am
> > > > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all
> our
> > > > Infra
> > > > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list discussion
> > in
> > > > > JIRA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this process
> to
> > > get
> > > > > the PR merged?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Carin
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a
> > clear
> > > > idea
> > > > > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and
> > > > submitted
> > > > > > it to my repo
> > > > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the
> lead
> > in
> > > > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <
> > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > >> web UI button:
> > > > > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being
> > > > stripped
> > > > > >> out
> > > > > >> > on email lists.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep.
> > 2018,
> > > > > 03:44:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or
> > > enable
> > > > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a
> different
> > > > github
> > > > > >> > > project):
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid
> > > creating
> > > > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical
> > > > > problem).
> > > > > >> But
> > > > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could
> > > confirm.
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > Best,
> > > > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> > > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be
> > > great.
> > > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will
> be
> > > out
> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and
> not
> > > > > >> because of
> > > > > >> > >> some
> > > > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out
> > > mentors
> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > >> create a
> > > > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29.
> > Sep.
> > > > > 2018,
> > > > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of
> master.
> > > It
> > > > > >> seemed
> > > > > >> > >> to go
> > > > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for
> > > > everyone.
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I
> > > think
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > most
> > > > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever
> way
> > is
> > > > the
> > > > > >> best
> > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> > > > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from
> > the
> > > > > >> github
> > > > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe
> it
> > is
> > > > > good
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using
> that.
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing
> due
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on
> > > *top*
> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> current
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the
> > project
> > > is
> > > > > not
> > > > > >> > >> linear
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we
> would
> > > like
> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > have
> > > > > >> > >> for
> > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main
> > repo
> > > > and
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> julia
> > > > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to
> have
> > > two
> > > > > >> tails
> > > > > >> > >> with
> > > > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on
> the
> > > > github
> > > > > >> > could
> > > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then
> > pushing
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > button
> > > > > >> > >> on
> > > > > >> > >> > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in
> > this
> > > > > >> case. I
> > > > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the
> github
> > > web
> > > > > >> > >> interface,
> > > > > >> > >> > but
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be
> done
> > > > > outside
> > > > > >> it
> > > > > >> > >> > because
> > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using
> > the
> > > > > >> subtree
> > > > > >> > and
> > > > > >> > >> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to
> > be a
> > > > > >> simple,
> > > > > >> > >> > "click
> > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand
> > > this
> > > > > task
> > > > > >> > off
> > > > > >> > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there
> > > > > >> correctly.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to
> take
> > > > this
> > > > > >> over?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> > > > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and
> > then
> > > > try
> > > > > >> merge
> > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
> > > > > >> contribution,
> > > > > >> > as
> > > > > >> > >> a
> > > > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list
> of
> > > > > >> commits is
> > > > > >> > >> big
> > > > > >> > >> > > and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is
> > > better
> > > > so
> > > > > >> you
> > > > > >> > >> keep
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on
> top
> > of
> > > > > >> master
> > > > > >> > you
> > > > > >> > >> > are
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be
> > > > > individually
> > > > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > > > >> > >> > > as
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come
> > > from
> > > > a
> > > > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to
> > > > summarize
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard
> for
> > > very
> > > > > >> good
> > > > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia
> > > > language
> > > > > >> from
> > > > > >> > >> its
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual
> > > > commits
> > > > > of
> > > > > >> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > many
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple
> > years
> > > > to
> > > > > >> make
> > > > > >> > >> this
> > > > > >> > >> > a
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge
> for
> > > it.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using
> a
> > > > tag. I
> > > > > >> > think
> > > > > >> > >> we
> > > > > >> > >> > > can
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other
> ways
> > > to
> > > > > >> browse
> > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can
> > add
> > > > the
> > > > > >> tag
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR
> > using
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > above
> > > > > >> > >> > > method
> > > > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to
> having
> > > the
> > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > >> > >> > > community
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration
> with
> > > > them.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan
> Zhang
> > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for
> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit
> > before
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > merge,
> > > > > >> > >> so
> > > > > >> > >> > > that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo
> > > commits
> > > > > by
> > > > > >> > >> skipping
> > > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer
> > to
> > > > take
> > > > > >> his
> > > > > >> > or
> > > > > >> > >> > her
> > > > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
> > > > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and
> track
> > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron
> > Markham
> > > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the
> efforts
> > > of
> > > > > all
> > > > > >> of
> > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim
> > it
> > > > down
> > > > > >> from
> > > > > >> > >> 700+
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy
> <
> > > > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1
> individual,
> > if
> > > > we
> > > > > >> > squash
> > > > > >> > >> > merge
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of
> those
> > > > > >> > individuals.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi
> > > Chen <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase
> merge
> > is
> > > > > that
> > > > > >> it
> > > > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> > > contributors,
> > > > > and
> > > > > >> > given
> > > > > >> > >> > that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has
> always
> > > > been
> > > > > a
> > > > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here
> > to
> > > > > >> preserve
> > > > > >> > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the
> Julia
> > > > > binding
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi
> > Chen
> > > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would
> suggest
> > > > rebase
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit
> log
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > Julia
> > > > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there
> > has
> > > > been
> > > > > >> done
> > > > > >> > >> > > through
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the
> > > > developer
> > > > > >> of
> > > > > >> > the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the
> > > commits
> > > > > >> more
> > > > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin
> > > Meier <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some
> > clarity
> > > > of
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> pros
> > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the
> > right
> > > > > >> > decision.
> > > > > >> > >> I
> > > > > >> > >> > > think
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I
> will
> > > > take a
> > > > > >> stab
> > > > > >> > >> > below
> > > > > >> > >> > > at
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I
> missed
> > > > any.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > feature
> > > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of
> > master.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to
> do
> > > git
> > > > > log
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >> > >> > browse
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github
> would
> > > > handle
> > > > > >> > >> squashing
> > > > > >> > >> > > all
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too
> much?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity
> of
> > > the
> > > > > >> > features
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit
> > > > message
> > > > > >> with
> > > > > >> > >> one
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the
> granularity
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> > individual
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project
> standard
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on
> top
> > > of
> > > > > >> master
> > > > > >> > >> that
> > > > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right
> before.
> > > > (like
> > > > > >> > someone
> > > > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM
> Chiyuan
> > > > Zhang
> > > > > <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of
> > the
> > > > two
> > > > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g.
> > > > preserving
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> > >> > history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical
> > issue
> > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > >> > >> using
> > > > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that
> > might
> > > be
> > > > > >> > >> difficult
> > > > > >> > >> > or
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely
> > that
> > > > > >> someone
> > > > > >> > is
> > > > > >> > >> > going
> > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> > > preserving
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > >> commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the
> > > change
> > > > > or
> > > > > >> > >> bisect
> > > > > >> > >> > for
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR
> > > > actually
> > > > > >> > >> contains
> > > > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development
> of
> > > the
> > > > > >> Julia
> > > > > >> > >> > binding
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started
> with a
> > > > > >> separate
> > > > > >> > >> repo
> > > > > >> > >> > due
> > > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of
> > > julia.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin
> > > > Meier <
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > > > >> > >> > ),
> > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of
> the
> > > > large
> > > > > >> > number
> > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual
> > "Squash
> > > > and
> > > > > >> > Merge".
> > > > > >> > >> > The
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging
> > > with a
> > > > > >> merge
> > > > > >> > >> > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits
> from
> > > this
> > > > > >> branch
> > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all
> > the
> > > > > commit
> > > > > >> > >> > messages
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits
> from
> > > this
> > > > > >> branch
> > > > > >> > >> will
> > > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github
> > > won't
> > > > > show
> > > > > >> > all
> > > > > >> > >> of
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle
> > the
> > > > > merge?
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > > >> > >> >
> > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>.
Micheal,

Thanks for catching up and helping us with this.
I do see the "view command line instructions". I just assumed that master
was a protected branch and I would not be able to push to it.
Honestly, I'm a bit scared if it isn't :)

What do you suggest? Should I try to merge and push to master?

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:19 PM Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit as you
> have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an option?  Do
> you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash and
> merge button?
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you Mike!
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Carin,
> > >
> > > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking everything, so I
> > > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.  Then I
> > am
> > > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all our
> > > Infra
> > > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list discussion
> in
> > > > JIRA.
> > > >
> > > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this process to
> > get
> > > > the PR merged?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Carin
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a
> clear
> > > idea
> > > > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > > > >
> > > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and
> > > submitted
> > > > > it to my repo
> > > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > > >
> > > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > > > >
> > > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the lead
> in
> > > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > > >
> > > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Carin
> > > > >
> > > > > <
> https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options
> for
> > > the
> > > > >> web UI button:
> > > > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being
> > > stripped
> > > > >> out
> > > > >> > on email lists.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep.
> 2018,
> > > > 03:44:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or
> > enable
> > > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a different
> > > github
> > > > >> > > project):
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid
> > creating
> > > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical
> > > > problem).
> > > > >> But
> > > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could
> > confirm.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Best,
> > > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be
> > great.
> > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will be
> > out
> > > of
> > > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and not
> > > > >> because of
> > > > >> > >> some
> > > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out
> > mentors
> > > > to
> > > > >> > >> create a
> > > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > > >> > >> >
> > > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > > >> > >> >
> > > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29.
> Sep.
> > > > 2018,
> > > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > > >> > >> >
> > > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of master.
> > It
> > > > >> seemed
> > > > >> > >> to go
> > > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for
> > > everyone.
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I
> > think
> > > > the
> > > > >> > most
> > > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever way
> is
> > > the
> > > > >> best
> > > > >> > >> to
> > > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> > > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from
> the
> > > > >> github
> > > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe it
> is
> > > > good
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using that.
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing due
> to
> > > the
> > > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> > > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on
> > *top*
> > > of
> > > > >> > >> current
> > > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the
> project
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > >> > >> linear
> > > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we would
> > like
> > > > to
> > > > >> > have
> > > > >> > >> for
> > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main
> repo
> > > and
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > >> julia
> > > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to have
> > two
> > > > >> tails
> > > > >> > >> with
> > > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on the
> > > github
> > > > >> > could
> > > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then
> pushing
> > > the
> > > > >> > button
> > > > >> > >> on
> > > > >> > >> > > the
> > > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in
> this
> > > > >> case. I
> > > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the github
> > web
> > > > >> > >> interface,
> > > > >> > >> > but
> > > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be done
> > > > outside
> > > > >> it
> > > > >> > >> > because
> > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > >> > >> >
> > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using
> the
> > > > >> subtree
> > > > >> > and
> > > > >> > >> > the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to
> be a
> > > > >> simple,
> > > > >> > >> > "click
> > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand
> > this
> > > > task
> > > > >> > off
> > > > >> > >> to
> > > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there
> > > > >> correctly.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to take
> > > this
> > > > >> over?
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> > > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and
> then
> > > try
> > > > >> merge
> > > > >> > >> that
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> > > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
> > > > >> contribution,
> > > > >> > as
> > > > >> > >> a
> > > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list of
> > > > >> commits is
> > > > >> > >> big
> > > > >> > >> > > and
> > > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is
> > better
> > > so
> > > > >> you
> > > > >> > >> keep
> > > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on top
> of
> > > > >> master
> > > > >> > you
> > > > >> > >> > are
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be
> > > > individually
> > > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > > >> > >> > > as
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come
> > from
> > > a
> > > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
> > > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to
> > > summarize
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard for
> > very
> > > > >> good
> > > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia
> > > language
> > > > >> from
> > > > >> > >> its
> > > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual
> > > commits
> > > > of
> > > > >> > the
> > > > >> > >> > many
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple
> years
> > > to
> > > > >> make
> > > > >> > >> this
> > > > >> > >> > a
> > > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge for
> > it.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using a
> > > tag. I
> > > > >> > think
> > > > >> > >> we
> > > > >> > >> > > can
> > > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other ways
> > to
> > > > >> browse
> > > > >> > >> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can
> add
> > > the
> > > > >> tag
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR
> using
> > > the
> > > > >> > above
> > > > >> > >> > > method
> > > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to having
> > the
> > > > >> Julia
> > > > >> > >> > > community
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration with
> > > them.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan Zhang
> <
> > > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for
> the
> > > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit
> before
> > > the
> > > > >> > merge,
> > > > >> > >> so
> > > > >> > >> > > that
> > > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo
> > commits
> > > > by
> > > > >> > >> skipping
> > > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer
> to
> > > take
> > > > >> his
> > > > >> > or
> > > > >> > >> > her
> > > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
> > > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and track
> > the
> > > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron
> Markham
> > <
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the efforts
> > of
> > > > all
> > > > >> of
> > > > >> > >> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim
> it
> > > down
> > > > >> from
> > > > >> > >> 700+
> > > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy <
> > > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1 individual,
> if
> > > we
> > > > >> > squash
> > > > >> > >> > merge
> > > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of those
> > > > >> > individuals.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi
> > Chen <
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase merge
> is
> > > > that
> > > > >> it
> > > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> > contributors,
> > > > and
> > > > >> > given
> > > > >> > >> > that
> > > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has always
> > > been
> > > > a
> > > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here
> to
> > > > >> preserve
> > > > >> > >> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the Julia
> > > > binding
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi
> Chen
> > <
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would suggest
> > > rebase
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit log
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > >> > Julia
> > > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there
> has
> > > been
> > > > >> done
> > > > >> > >> > > through
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the
> > > developer
> > > > >> of
> > > > >> > the
> > > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the
> > commits
> > > > >> more
> > > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin
> > Meier <
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some
> clarity
> > > of
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > >> pros
> > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the
> right
> > > > >> > decision.
> > > > >> > >> I
> > > > >> > >> > > think
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I will
> > > take a
> > > > >> stab
> > > > >> > >> > below
> > > > >> > >> > > at
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed
> > > any.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit
> for
> > > the
> > > > >> > feature
> > > > >> > >> > and
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of
> master.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to do
> > git
> > > > log
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> > >> > browse
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github would
> > > handle
> > > > >> > >> squashing
> > > > >> > >> > > all
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too much?
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity of
> > the
> > > > >> > features
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit
> > > message
> > > > >> with
> > > > >> > >> one
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the granularity
> of
> > > the
> > > > >> > >> > individual
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project standard
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on top
> > of
> > > > >> master
> > > > >> > >> that
> > > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right before.
> > > (like
> > > > >> > someone
> > > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan
> > > Zhang
> > > > <
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of
> the
> > > two
> > > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g.
> > > preserving
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > >> > history
> > > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical
> issue
> > > > (e.g.
> > > > >> > >> using
> > > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that
> might
> > be
> > > > >> > >> difficult
> > > > >> > >> > or
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely
> that
> > > > >> someone
> > > > >> > is
> > > > >> > >> > going
> > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> > preserving
> > > > the
> > > > >> > >> commit
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the
> > change
> > > > or
> > > > >> > >> bisect
> > > > >> > >> > for
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR
> > > actually
> > > > >> > >> contains
> > > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development of
> > the
> > > > >> Julia
> > > > >> > >> > binding
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started with a
> > > > >> separate
> > > > >> > >> repo
> > > > >> > >> > due
> > > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of
> > julia.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin
> > > Meier <
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > > >> > >> > ),
> > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of the
> > > large
> > > > >> > number
> > > > >> > >> of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual
> "Squash
> > > and
> > > > >> > Merge".
> > > > >> > >> > The
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging
> > with a
> > > > >> merge
> > > > >> > >> > commit
> > > > >> > >> > > is
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits from
> > this
> > > > >> branch
> > > > >> > >> will
> > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all
> the
> > > > commit
> > > > >> > >> > messages
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from
> > this
> > > > >> branch
> > > > >> > >> will
> > > > >> > >> > > be
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github
> > won't
> > > > show
> > > > >> > all
> > > > >> > >> of
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle
> the
> > > > merge?
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Michael Wall <mj...@gmail.com>.
Just now looking at this.  The button is disabled for merge commit as you
have mentioned.  Before I go to INFRA, is the command line an option?  Do
you see "or view command line instructions" beside the green squash and
merge button?

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:09 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you Mike!
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Carin,
> >
> > I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking everything, so I
> > want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.  Then I
> am
> > happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all our
> > Infra
> > > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list discussion in
> > > JIRA.
> > >
> > > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this process to
> get
> > > the PR merged?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Carin
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a clear
> > idea
> > > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > > >
> > > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and
> > submitted
> > > > it to my repo
> > > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.
> > > >
> > > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > > >
> > > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > > >
> > > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the lead in
> > > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > > >
> > > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Carin
> > > >
> > > > <https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > > >>
> > > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options for
> > the
> > > >> web UI button:
> > > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being
> > stripped
> > > >> out
> > > >> > on email lists.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep. 2018,
> > > 03:44:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or
> enable
> > > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a different
> > github
> > > >> > > project):
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid
> creating
> > > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical
> > > problem).
> > > >> But
> > > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could
> confirm.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Best,
> > > >> > > Chiyuan
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <
> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be
> great.
> > > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will be
> out
> > of
> > > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and not
> > > >> because of
> > > >> > >> some
> > > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out
> mentors
> > > to
> > > >> > >> create a
> > > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > -Marco
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29. Sep.
> > > 2018,
> > > >> > >> 01:17:
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of master.
> It
> > > >> seemed
> > > >> > >> to go
> > > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for
> > everyone.
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I
> think
> > > the
> > > >> > most
> > > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever way is
> > the
> > > >> best
> > > >> > >> to
> > > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> > > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > pluskid@gmail.com
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from the
> > > >> github
> > > >> > >> > > interface
> > > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe it is
> > > good
> > > >> to
> > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using that.
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing due to
> > the
> > > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> > > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on
> *top*
> > of
> > > >> > >> current
> > > >> > >> > > >    history
> > > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the project
> is
> > > not
> > > >> > >> linear
> > > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we would
> like
> > > to
> > > >> > have
> > > >> > >> for
> > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main repo
> > and
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> julia
> > > >> > >> > > > branch
> > > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to have
> two
> > > >> tails
> > > >> > >> with
> > > >> > >> > > > their
> > > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on the
> > github
> > > >> > could
> > > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then pushing
> > the
> > > >> > button
> > > >> > >> on
> > > >> > >> > > the
> > > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in this
> > > >> case. I
> > > >> > >> > > > originally
> > > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the github
> web
> > > >> > >> interface,
> > > >> > >> > but
> > > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be done
> > > outside
> > > >> it
> > > >> > >> > because
> > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using the
> > > >> subtree
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > >> > the
> > > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to be a
> > > >> simple,
> > > >> > >> > "click
> > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand
> this
> > > task
> > > >> > off
> > > >> > >> to
> > > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there
> > > >> correctly.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to take
> > this
> > > >> over?
> > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> > > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and then
> > try
> > > >> merge
> > > >> > >> that
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> > > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
> > > >> contribution,
> > > >> > as
> > > >> > >> a
> > > >> > >> > > > general
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list of
> > > >> commits is
> > > >> > >> big
> > > >> > >> > > and
> > > >> > >> > > > > you
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is
> better
> > so
> > > >> you
> > > >> > >> keep
> > > >> > >> > > > > history
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on top of
> > > >> master
> > > >> > you
> > > >> > >> > are
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be
> > > individually
> > > >> > >> > reverted
> > > >> > >> > > as
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come
> from
> > a
> > > >> > >> mercurial
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
> > > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to
> > summarize
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> > feedback
> > > >> > >> > > > > from
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard for
> very
> > > >> good
> > > >> > >> > reasons.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia
> > language
> > > >> from
> > > >> > >> its
> > > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual
> > commits
> > > of
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > >> > many
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple years
> > to
> > > >> make
> > > >> > >> this
> > > >> > >> > a
> > > >> > >> > > > > great
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge for
> it.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using a
> > tag. I
> > > >> > think
> > > >> > >> we
> > > >> > >> > > can
> > > >> > >> > > > > try
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other ways
> to
> > > >> browse
> > > >> > >> the
> > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can add
> > the
> > > >> tag
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR using
> > the
> > > >> > above
> > > >> > >> > > method
> > > >> > >> > > > in
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to having
> the
> > > >> Julia
> > > >> > >> > > community
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration with
> > them.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for the
> > > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit before
> > the
> > > >> > merge,
> > > >> > >> so
> > > >> > >> > > that
> > > >> > >> > > > > in
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo
> commits
> > > by
> > > >> > >> skipping
> > > >> > >> > > > this
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer to
> > take
> > > >> his
> > > >> > or
> > > >> > >> > her
> > > >> > >> > > > hand
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
> > > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and track
> the
> > > >> > >> > contributions.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron Markham
> <
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the efforts
> of
> > > all
> > > >> of
> > > >> > >> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim it
> > down
> > > >> from
> > > >> > >> 700+
> > > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy <
> > > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1 individual, if
> > we
> > > >> > squash
> > > >> > >> > merge
> > > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of those
> > > >> > individuals.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi
> Chen <
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase merge is
> > > that
> > > >> it
> > > >> > >> > > preserves
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package
> contributors,
> > > and
> > > >> > given
> > > >> > >> > that
> > > >> > >> > > > the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has always
> > been
> > > a
> > > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here to
> > > >> preserve
> > > >> > >> the
> > > >> > >> > > > commit
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the Julia
> > > binding
> > > >> and
> > > >> > >> > > welcome
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi Chen
> <
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would suggest
> > rebase
> > > >> and
> > > >> > >> > merge.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit log
> of
> > > the
> > > >> > Julia
> > > >> > >> > > > binding
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there has
> > been
> > > >> done
> > > >> > >> > > through
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the
> > developer
> > > >> of
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the
> commits
> > > >> more
> > > >> > >> > easily.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin
> Meier <
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some clarity
> > of
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> pros
> > > >> > >> > and
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the right
> > > >> > decision.
> > > >> > >> I
> > > >> > >> > > think
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I will
> > take a
> > > >> stab
> > > >> > >> > below
> > > >> > >> > > at
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed
> > any.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit for
> > the
> > > >> > feature
> > > >> > >> > and
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of master.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to do
> git
> > > log
> > > >> to
> > > >> > >> > browse
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github would
> > handle
> > > >> > >> squashing
> > > >> > >> > > all
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too much?
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity of
> the
> > > >> > features
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit
> > message
> > > >> with
> > > >> > >> one
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the granularity of
> > the
> > > >> > >> > individual
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project standard
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on top
> of
> > > >> master
> > > >> > >> that
> > > >> > >> > > > might
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right before.
> > (like
> > > >> > someone
> > > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan
> > Zhang
> > > <
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of the
> > two
> > > >> > >> > approaches?
> > > >> > >> > > Is
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g.
> > preserving
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> > history
> > > >> > >> > > > of
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical issue
> > > (e.g.
> > > >> > >> using
> > > >> > >> > > > squash
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that might
> be
> > > >> > >> difficult
> > > >> > >> > or
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely that
> > > >> someone
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > >> > going
> > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But
> preserving
> > > the
> > > >> > >> commit
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the
> change
> > > or
> > > >> > >> bisect
> > > >> > >> > for
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR
> > actually
> > > >> > >> contains
> > > >> > >> > > 700+
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development of
> the
> > > >> Julia
> > > >> > >> > binding
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started with a
> > > >> separate
> > > >> > >> repo
> > > >> > >> > due
> > > >> > >> > > > to
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of
> julia.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin
> > Meier <
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > > >> > >> > ),
> > > >> > >> > > is
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of the
> > large
> > > >> > number
> > > >> > >> of
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual "Squash
> > and
> > > >> > Merge".
> > > >> > >> > The
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging
> with a
> > > >> merge
> > > >> > >> > commit
> > > >> > >> > > is
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits from
> this
> > > >> branch
> > > >> > >> will
> > > >> > >> > > be
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all the
> > > commit
> > > >> > >> > messages
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from
> this
> > > >> branch
> > > >> > >> will
> > > >> > >> > > be
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github
> won't
> > > show
> > > >> > all
> > > >> > >> of
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle the
> > > merge?
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > > >> > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >> > > >
> > > >> > >> > >
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>.
Thank you Mike!

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Carin,
>
> I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking everything, so I
> want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.  Then I am
> happy to submit an INFRA ticket.
>
> Mike
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all our
> Infra
> > tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list discussion in
> > JIRA.
> >
> > Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this process to get
> > the PR merged?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Carin
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a clear
> idea
> > > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> > >
> > > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and
> submitted
> > > it to my repo
> > > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.
> > >
> > > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > > Here is the result of the repo:
> > > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> > >
> > > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> > >
> > > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the lead in
> > > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> > >
> > > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Carin
> > >
> > > <https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> > >>
> > >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options for
> the
> > >> web UI button:
> > >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being
> stripped
> > >> out
> > >> > on email lists.
> > >> >
> > >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep. 2018,
> > 03:44:
> > >> >
> > >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or enable
> > >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a different
> github
> > >> > > project):
> > >> > >
> > >> > > [image: image.png]
> > >> > >
> > >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid creating
> > >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical
> > problem).
> > >> But
> > >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could confirm.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Best,
> > >> > > Chiyuan
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <carinmeier@gmail.com
> >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be great.
> > >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will be out
> of
> > >> > >> communication for a bit
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> > >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and not
> > >> because of
> > >> > >> some
> > >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out mentors
> > to
> > >> > >> create a
> > >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > -Marco
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29. Sep.
> > 2018,
> > >> > >> 01:17:
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of master. It
> > >> seemed
> > >> > >> to go
> > >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for
> everyone.
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I think
> > the
> > >> > most
> > >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever way is
> the
> > >> best
> > >> > >> to
> > >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> > >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > pluskid@gmail.com
> > >> >
> > >> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from the
> > >> github
> > >> > >> > > interface
> > >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe it is
> > good
> > >> to
> > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using that.
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing due to
> the
> > >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> > >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on *top*
> of
> > >> > >> current
> > >> > >> > > >    history
> > >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the project is
> > not
> > >> > >> linear
> > >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we would like
> > to
> > >> > have
> > >> > >> for
> > >> > >> > > > this
> > >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main repo
> and
> > >> the
> > >> > >> julia
> > >> > >> > > > branch
> > >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to have two
> > >> tails
> > >> > >> with
> > >> > >> > > > their
> > >> > >> > > >    own history.
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on the
> github
> > >> > could
> > >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then pushing
> the
> > >> > button
> > >> > >> on
> > >> > >> > > the
> > >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > Best,
> > >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> > >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in this
> > >> case. I
> > >> > >> > > > originally
> > >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the github web
> > >> > >> interface,
> > >> > >> > but
> > >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be done
> > outside
> > >> it
> > >> > >> > because
> > >> > >> > > > of
> > >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> > >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using the
> > >> subtree
> > >> > and
> > >> > >> > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to be a
> > >> simple,
> > >> > >> > "click
> > >> > >> > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand this
> > task
> > >> > off
> > >> > >> to
> > >> > >> > > > > someone
> > >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there
> > >> correctly.
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to take
> this
> > >> over?
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> > >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and then
> try
> > >> merge
> > >> > >> that
> > >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> > >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
> > >> contribution,
> > >> > as
> > >> > >> a
> > >> > >> > > > general
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list of
> > >> commits is
> > >> > >> big
> > >> > >> > > and
> > >> > >> > > > > you
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is better
> so
> > >> you
> > >> > >> keep
> > >> > >> > > > > history
> > >> > >> > > > > >> and
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on top of
> > >> master
> > >> > you
> > >> > >> > are
> > >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be
> > individually
> > >> > >> > reverted
> > >> > >> > > as
> > >> > >> > > > > >> some
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come from
> a
> > >> > >> mercurial
> > >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
> > >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to
> summarize
> > >> the
> > >> > >> > feedback
> > >> > >> > > > > from
> > >> > >> > > > > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard for very
> > >> good
> > >> > >> > reasons.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia
> language
> > >> from
> > >> > >> its
> > >> > >> > > > > sibling
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual
> commits
> > of
> > >> > the
> > >> > >> > many
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple years
> to
> > >> make
> > >> > >> this
> > >> > >> > a
> > >> > >> > > > > great
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge for it.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using a
> tag. I
> > >> > think
> > >> > >> we
> > >> > >> > > can
> > >> > >> > > > > try
> > >> > >> > > > > >> it
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other ways to
> > >> browse
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > commit
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can add
> the
> > >> tag
> > >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR using
> the
> > >> > above
> > >> > >> > > method
> > >> > >> > > > in
> > >> > >> > > > > >> my
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to having the
> > >> Julia
> > >> > >> > > community
> > >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration with
> them.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> > >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for the
> > >> > >> > aforementioned
> > >> > >> > > > > issue,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit before
> the
> > >> > merge,
> > >> > >> so
> > >> > >> > > that
> > >> > >> > > > > in
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo commits
> > by
> > >> > >> skipping
> > >> > >> > > > this
> > >> > >> > > > > >> big
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer to
> take
> > >> his
> > >> > or
> > >> > >> > her
> > >> > >> > > > hand
> > >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
> > >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and track the
> > >> > >> > contributions.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron Markham <
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the efforts of
> > all
> > >> of
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim it
> down
> > >> from
> > >> > >> 700+
> > >> > >> > > > > commits
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy <
> > >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1 individual, if
> we
> > >> > squash
> > >> > >> > merge
> > >> > >> > > > > we'll
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of those
> > >> > individuals.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi Chen <
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase merge is
> > that
> > >> it
> > >> > >> > > preserves
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package contributors,
> > and
> > >> > given
> > >> > >> > that
> > >> > >> > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has always
> been
> > a
> > >> > >> > > high-quality
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here to
> > >> preserve
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > commit
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the Julia
> > binding
> > >> and
> > >> > >> > > welcome
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi Chen <
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would suggest
> rebase
> > >> and
> > >> > >> > merge.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit log of
> > the
> > >> > Julia
> > >> > >> > > > binding
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there has
> been
> > >> done
> > >> > >> > > through
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the
> developer
> > >> of
> > >> > the
> > >> > >> > > > effort.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the commits
> > >> more
> > >> > >> > easily.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin Meier <
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some clarity
> of
> > >> the
> > >> > >> pros
> > >> > >> > and
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the right
> > >> > decision.
> > >> > >> I
> > >> > >> > > think
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I will
> take a
> > >> stab
> > >> > >> > below
> > >> > >> > > at
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed
> any.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit for
> the
> > >> > feature
> > >> > >> > and
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of master.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to do git
> > log
> > >> to
> > >> > >> > browse
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github would
> handle
> > >> > >> squashing
> > >> > >> > > all
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too much?
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity of the
> > >> > features
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit
> message
> > >> with
> > >> > >> one
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the granularity of
> the
> > >> > >> > individual
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project standard
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on top of
> > >> master
> > >> > >> that
> > >> > >> > > > might
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right before.
> (like
> > >> > someone
> > >> > >> > > > browsing
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan
> Zhang
> > <
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of the
> two
> > >> > >> > approaches?
> > >> > >> > > Is
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g.
> preserving
> > >> the
> > >> > >> > history
> > >> > >> > > > of
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical issue
> > (e.g.
> > >> > >> using
> > >> > >> > > > squash
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that might be
> > >> > >> difficult
> > >> > >> > or
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely that
> > >> someone
> > >> > is
> > >> > >> > going
> > >> > >> > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But preserving
> > the
> > >> > >> commit
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the change
> > or
> > >> > >> bisect
> > >> > >> > for
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR
> actually
> > >> > >> contains
> > >> > >> > > 700+
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development of the
> > >> Julia
> > >> > >> > binding
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started with a
> > >> separate
> > >> > >> repo
> > >> > >> > due
> > >> > >> > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of julia.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin
> Meier <
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> > >> > >> > ),
> > >> > >> > > is
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of the
> large
> > >> > number
> > >> > >> of
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual "Squash
> and
> > >> > Merge".
> > >> > >> > The
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging with a
> > >> merge
> > >> > >> > commit
> > >> > >> > > is
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits from this
> > >> branch
> > >> > >> will
> > >> > >> > > be
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all the
> > commit
> > >> > >> > messages
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from this
> > >> branch
> > >> > >> will
> > >> > >> > > be
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github won't
> > show
> > >> > all
> > >> > >> of
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle the
> > merge?
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> > >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Michael Wall <mj...@apache.org>.
Hi Carin,

I will take a look at this tonight.  I am not tracking everything, so I
want to go back and make sure I understand what is being asked.  Then I am
happy to submit an INFRA ticket.

Mike

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:36 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all our Infra
> tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list discussion in
> JIRA.
>
> Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this process to get
> the PR merged?
>
> Thanks,
> Carin
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a clear idea
> > of the process and what the expected results will look like.
> >
> > - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> > - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and submitted
> > it to my repo
> > - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.
> >
> > Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> > http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> > Here is the result of the repo:
> > https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
> >
> > Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
> >
> > If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the lead in
> > requesting the actions from INFRA?
> >
> > It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Carin
> >
> > <https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
> >>
> >> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options for the
> >> web UI button:
> >> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
> >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being stripped
> >> out
> >> > on email lists.
> >> >
> >> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep. 2018,
> 03:44:
> >> >
> >> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or enable
> >> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a different github
> >> > > project):
> >> > >
> >> > > [image: image.png]
> >> > >
> >> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid creating
> >> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical
> problem).
> >> But
> >> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could confirm.
> >> > >
> >> > > Best,
> >> > > Chiyuan
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be great.
> >> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will be out of
> >> > >> communication for a bit
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
> >> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and not
> >> because of
> >> > >> some
> >> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out mentors
> to
> >> > >> create a
> >> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > -Marco
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29. Sep.
> 2018,
> >> > >> 01:17:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of master. It
> >> seemed
> >> > >> to go
> >> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for everyone.
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I think
> the
> >> > most
> >> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever way is the
> >> best
> >> > >> to
> >> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
> >> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> pluskid@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from the
> >> github
> >> > >> > > interface
> >> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe it is
> good
> >> to
> >> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using that.
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing due to the
> >> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
> >> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on *top* of
> >> > >> current
> >> > >> > > >    history
> >> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the project is
> not
> >> > >> linear
> >> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we would like
> to
> >> > have
> >> > >> for
> >> > >> > > > this
> >> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main repo and
> >> the
> >> > >> julia
> >> > >> > > > branch
> >> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to have two
> >> tails
> >> > >> with
> >> > >> > > > their
> >> > >> > > >    own history.
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on the github
> >> > could
> >> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then pushing the
> >> > button
> >> > >> on
> >> > >> > > the
> >> > >> > > > web might simply work.
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > > Best,
> >> > >> > > > Chiyuan
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
> >> carinmeier@gmail.com
> >> > >
> >> > >> > > wrote:
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in this
> >> case. I
> >> > >> > > > originally
> >> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the github web
> >> > >> interface,
> >> > >> > but
> >> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be done
> outside
> >> it
> >> > >> > because
> >> > >> > > > of
> >> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
> >> > >> > > > >
> >> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
> >> > carinmeier@gmail.com
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > > > wrote:
> >> > >> > > > >
> >> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using the
> >> subtree
> >> > and
> >> > >> > the
> >> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to be a
> >> simple,
> >> > >> > "click
> >> > >> > > > the
> >> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand this
> task
> >> > off
> >> > >> to
> >> > >> > > > > someone
> >> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there
> >> correctly.
> >> > >> > > > > >
> >> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to take this
> >> over?
> >> > >> > > > > >
> >> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> >> > >> > > > > > Carin
> >> > >> > > > > >
> >> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
> >> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > > > wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >
> >> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and then try
> >> merge
> >> > >> that
> >> > >> > > > > >> branch?
> >> > >> > > > > >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
> >> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
> >> contribution,
> >> > as
> >> > >> a
> >> > >> > > > general
> >> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list of
> >> commits is
> >> > >> big
> >> > >> > > and
> >> > >> > > > > you
> >> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is better so
> >> you
> >> > >> keep
> >> > >> > > > > history
> >> > >> > > > > >> and
> >> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on top of
> >> master
> >> > you
> >> > >> > are
> >> > >> > > > > >> changing
> >> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be
> individually
> >> > >> > reverted
> >> > >> > > as
> >> > >> > > > > >> some
> >> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come from a
> >> > >> mercurial
> >> > >> > > > > >> background,
> >> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
> >> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
> >> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
> >> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to summarize
> >> the
> >> > >> > feedback
> >> > >> > > > > from
> >> > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard for very
> >> good
> >> > >> > reasons.
> >> > >> > > > > >> However,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia language
> >> from
> >> > >> its
> >> > >> > > > > sibling
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual commits
> of
> >> > the
> >> > >> > many
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple years to
> >> make
> >> > >> this
> >> > >> > a
> >> > >> > > > > great
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge for it.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using a tag. I
> >> > think
> >> > >> we
> >> > >> > > can
> >> > >> > > > > try
> >> > >> > > > > >> it
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other ways to
> >> browse
> >> > >> the
> >> > >> > > > commit
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can add the
> >> tag
> >> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR using the
> >> > above
> >> > >> > > method
> >> > >> > > > in
> >> > >> > > > > >> my
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to having the
> >> Julia
> >> > >> > > community
> >> > >> > > > > >> join the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration with them.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
> >> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for the
> >> > >> > aforementioned
> >> > >> > > > > issue,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit before the
> >> > merge,
> >> > >> so
> >> > >> > > that
> >> > >> > > > > in
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> case
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo commits
> by
> >> > >> skipping
> >> > >> > > > this
> >> > >> > > > > >> big
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer to take
> >> his
> >> > or
> >> > >> > her
> >> > >> > > > hand
> >> > >> > > > > >> on.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
> >> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and track the
> >> > >> > contributions.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron Markham <
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the efforts of
> all
> >> of
> >> > >> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim it down
> >> from
> >> > >> 700+
> >> > >> > > > > commits
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy <
> >> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1 individual, if we
> >> > squash
> >> > >> > merge
> >> > >> > > > > we'll
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of those
> >> > individuals.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi Chen <
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase merge is
> that
> >> it
> >> > >> > > preserves
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package contributors,
> and
> >> > given
> >> > >> > that
> >> > >> > > > the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has always been
> a
> >> > >> > > high-quality
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here to
> >> preserve
> >> > >> the
> >> > >> > > > commit
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the Julia
> binding
> >> and
> >> > >> > > welcome
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> them
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi Chen <
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would suggest rebase
> >> and
> >> > >> > merge.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit log of
> the
> >> > Julia
> >> > >> > > > binding
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> is
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there has been
> >> done
> >> > >> > > through
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the developer
> >> of
> >> > the
> >> > >> > > > effort.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> It
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the commits
> >> more
> >> > >> > easily.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin Meier <
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some clarity of
> >> the
> >> > >> pros
> >> > >> > and
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the right
> >> > decision.
> >> > >> I
> >> > >> > > think
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I will take a
> >> stab
> >> > >> > below
> >> > >> > > at
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed any.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit for the
> >> > feature
> >> > >> > and
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of master.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to do git
> log
> >> to
> >> > >> > browse
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github would handle
> >> > >> squashing
> >> > >> > > all
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too much?
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity of the
> >> > features
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit message
> >> with
> >> > >> one
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the granularity of the
> >> > >> > individual
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project standard
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on top of
> >> master
> >> > >> that
> >> > >> > > > might
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right before. (like
> >> > someone
> >> > >> > > > browsing
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan Zhang
> <
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of the two
> >> > >> > approaches?
> >> > >> > > Is
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g. preserving
> >> the
> >> > >> > history
> >> > >> > > > of
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical issue
> (e.g.
> >> > >> using
> >> > >> > > > squash
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that might be
> >> > >> difficult
> >> > >> > or
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely that
> >> someone
> >> > is
> >> > >> > going
> >> > >> > > > to
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But preserving
> the
> >> > >> commit
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> history
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the change
> or
> >> > >> bisect
> >> > >> > for
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> some
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR actually
> >> > >> contains
> >> > >> > > 700+
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development of the
> >> Julia
> >> > >> > binding
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started with a
> >> separate
> >> > >> repo
> >> > >> > due
> >> > >> > > > to
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of julia.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin Meier <
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
> >> > >> > ),
> >> > >> > > is
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of the large
> >> > number
> >> > >> of
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual "Squash and
> >> > Merge".
> >> > >> > The
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging with a
> >> merge
> >> > >> > commit
> >> > >> > > is
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits from this
> >> branch
> >> > >> will
> >> > >> > > be
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all the
> commit
> >> > >> > messages
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from this
> >> branch
> >> > >> will
> >> > >> > > be
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github won't
> show
> >> > all
> >> > >> of
> >> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle the
> merge?
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>>
> >> > >> > > > > >> >>
> >> > >> > > > > >>
> >> > >> > > > > >
> >> > >> > > > >
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

Posted by Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>.
I just found out that since we are a podling, we should route all our Infra
tickets through one of our mentors and link the dev list discussion in JIRA.

Is there a mentor that is willing to help us navigate this process to get
the PR merged?

Thanks,
Carin

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:42 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Marco - Thanks for the "dry run" idea. It will give everyone a clear idea
> of the process and what the expected results will look like.
>
> - I took my fork of the repo and synced my master branch.
> - @iblis17 made a copy of the branch of the Julia import PR and submitted
> it to my repo
> - I merged it with the "Merge" option through the web interface.
>
> Here is a gif of the process of merging:
> http://g.recordit.co/DzBcFtnjmV.gif
> Here is the result of the repo:
> https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet
>
> Please everyone take a look and validate that this looks ok.
>
> If there are no objections, Marco - could you please take the lead in
> requesting the actions from INFRA?
>
> It will be great to *finally* get this PR in  :)
>
> Thanks,
> Carin
>
> <https://github.com/gigasquid/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:02 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry, here is the image: https://imgur.com/V5wd2XB
>>
>> And here is the github document on the 3 different merge options for the
>> web UI button:
>> https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-request-merges/
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM Marco de Abreu
>> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > Could you upload the picture somewhere please? HTML is being stripped
>> out
>> > on email lists.
>> >
>> > Chiyuan Zhang <pl...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 30. Sep. 2018, 03:44:
>> >
>> > > There is an option in the repo settings menu to disable or enable
>> > > merge-commit for PR, see a screenshot below (from a different github
>> > > project):
>> > >
>> > > [image: image.png]
>> > >
>> > > My guess is that this is disabled for the reason to avoid creating
>> > > non-linear history for standard PRs (as oppose to technical problem).
>> But
>> > > this is only my guess, it would be great if someone could confirm.
>> > >
>> > > Best,
>> > > Chiyuan
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I believe so, but if someone wants to confirm it would be great.
>> > >> Unfortunately, I just came down with a cold/flu so I will be out of
>> > >> communication for a bit
>> > >>
>> > >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marco de Abreu
>> > >> <ma...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Are we sure that this is due to lacking permissions and not
>> because of
>> > >> some
>> > >> > technical limitation? If we are certain, we can ask out mentors to
>> > >> create a
>> > >> > ticket with Apache Infra to make that switch.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > -Marco
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Carin Meier <ca...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 29. Sep. 2018,
>> > >> 01:17:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > I made a test regular merge commit into a copy of master. It
>> seemed
>> > >> to go
>> > >> > > fine. Here is a listing of what it will look like for everyone.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits/test-merge-julia-import
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Although, I would be happy to push the merge button. I think the
>> > most
>> > >> > > important thing is to get the PR merged, so whatever way is the
>> best
>> > >> to
>> > >> > > make that happen, let's do it.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > So - Does the regular merge seem like a good option?
>> > >> > > If so, what is the best way to make that happen?
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:05 PM Chiyuan Zhang <pluskid@gmail.com
>> >
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > > Agreed with Pedro. Maybe the merge-commit option from the
>> github
>> > >> > > interface
>> > >> > > > was disabled for a reason. But as Pedro said, maybe it is good
>> to
>> > >> > > > temporarily enable it for this PR and merge using that.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >    - It should be technically easier than rebasing due to the
>> > >> > > >    git-subtree-import issue we are currently having
>> > >> > > >    - It also avoid stacking a huge commit history on *top* of
>> > >> current
>> > >> > > >    history
>> > >> > > >    - The downside is probably the history of the project is not
>> > >> linear
>> > >> > > >    anymore, but I think this is actually what we would like to
>> > have
>> > >> for
>> > >> > > > this
>> > >> > > >    particular case, because the contents of the main repo and
>> the
>> > >> julia
>> > >> > > > branch
>> > >> > > >    actually does not overlap. So it makes sense to have two
>> tails
>> > >> with
>> > >> > > > their
>> > >> > > >    own history.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Carin: I guess if someone with admin permission on the github
>> > could
>> > >> > > > temporarily enable the merge-commit option, then pushing the
>> > button
>> > >> on
>> > >> > > the
>> > >> > > > web might simply work.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Best,
>> > >> > > > Chiyuan
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:53 PM Carin Meier <
>> carinmeier@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > > Pedro - Maybe a merge commit is a better answer in this
>> case. I
>> > >> > > > originally
>> > >> > > > > ruled it out since it wasn't an option in the github web
>> > >> interface,
>> > >> > but
>> > >> > > > > since this looks like it is going to have to be done outside
>> it
>> > >> > because
>> > >> > > > of
>> > >> > > > > the subtrees anyway, it might be a better fit.
>> > >> > > > >
>> > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:07 PM Carin Meier <
>> > carinmeier@gmail.com
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > > >
>> > >> > > > > > We are actually running into troubles with using the
>> subtree
>> > and
>> > >> > the
>> > >> > > > > > rebase. Since it looks like this is not going to be a
>> simple,
>> > >> > "click
>> > >> > > > the
>> > >> > > > > > button" through the web page merge, I rather hand this task
>> > off
>> > >> to
>> > >> > > > > someone
>> > >> > > > > > with more context in making sure it gets in there
>> correctly.
>> > >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > > > > Chiyuan or any others, would you be willing to take this
>> over?
>> > >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > > > > Thanks,
>> > >> > > > > > Carin
>> > >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:00 PM Naveen Swamy <
>> > >> mnnaveen@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > > > >> Should we try to first being into a branch and then try
>> merge
>> > >> that
>> > >> > > > > >> branch?
>> > >> > > > > >>
>> > >> > > > > >> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Pedro Larroy <
>> > >> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > > > >> > I'm not familiar with the specifics of this
>> contribution,
>> > as
>> > >> a
>> > >> > > > general
>> > >> > > > > >> > approach my understanding is that if the list of
>> commits is
>> > >> big
>> > >> > > and
>> > >> > > > > you
>> > >> > > > > >> > want to preserve history, usually merging is better so
>> you
>> > >> keep
>> > >> > > > > history
>> > >> > > > > >> and
>> > >> > > > > >> > causality, if you rebase all the commits on top of
>> master
>> > you
>> > >> > are
>> > >> > > > > >> changing
>> > >> > > > > >> > the history of these commits which can't be individually
>> > >> > reverted
>> > >> > > as
>> > >> > > > > >> some
>> > >> > > > > >> > have suggested before. Maybe is because I come from a
>> > >> mercurial
>> > >> > > > > >> background,
>> > >> > > > > >> > but my initial impression would be either to:
>> > >> > > > > >> > 1. squash everything and rebase
>> > >> > > > > >> > 2. or merge without rebasing or squashing.
>> > >> > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > > > >> > Pedro.
>> > >> > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:10 PM Carin Meier <
>> > >> > > carinmeier@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone for the input. I'll try to summarize
>> the
>> > >> > feedback
>> > >> > > > > from
>> > >> > > > > >> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >> responses:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >> >> Using Squash-Merge is the project standard for very
>> good
>> > >> > reasons.
>> > >> > > > > >> However,
>> > >> > > > > >> >> in the case of this PR to bring in the Julia language
>> from
>> > >> its
>> > >> > > > > sibling
>> > >> > > > > >> >> repo, we want to preserve all the individual commits of
>> > the
>> > >> > many
>> > >> > > > > >> >> contributors that have worked over multiple years to
>> make
>> > >> this
>> > >> > a
>> > >> > > > > great
>> > >> > > > > >> >> language binding. We will use Rebase-Merge for it.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >> >> Chiyuan - thanks for the suggestion of using a tag. I
>> > think
>> > >> we
>> > >> > > can
>> > >> > > > > try
>> > >> > > > > >> it
>> > >> > > > > >> >> initially without it since there are other ways to
>> browse
>> > >> the
>> > >> > > > commit
>> > >> > > > > >> >> history, like looking at the PRs. But, we can add the
>> tag
>> > >> > > > > >> retroactively if
>> > >> > > > > >> >> people start having trouble.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >> >> If there no objections, I will merge the PR using the
>> > above
>> > >> > > method
>> > >> > > > in
>> > >> > > > > >> my
>> > >> > > > > >> >> morning (EST).
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >> >> Thanks everyone! I'm looking forward to having the
>> Julia
>> > >> > > community
>> > >> > > > > >> join the
>> > >> > > > > >> >> main repo and increasing our collaboration with them.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >> >> Best,
>> > >> > > > > >> >> Carin
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 1:37 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
>> > >> > > pluskid@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> +1 for rebase and merge. As a workaround for the
>> > >> > aforementioned
>> > >> > > > > issue,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> maybe we can create a tag for the commit before the
>> > merge,
>> > >> so
>> > >> > > that
>> > >> > > > > in
>> > >> > > > > >> >> case
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> people want to browse the recent main-repo commits by
>> > >> skipping
>> > >> > > > this
>> > >> > > > > >> big
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> chunk of rebased commits, there is a pointer to take
>> his
>> > or
>> > >> > her
>> > >> > > > hand
>> > >> > > > > >> on.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> Best,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> Chiyuan
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:34 AM Jason Dai <
>> > >> > jason.dai@gmail.com
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> +1 to rebase and merge to preserve and track the
>> > >> > contributions.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> Thanks,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> -Jason
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Aaron Markham <
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> aaron.s.markham@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> +1 to rebase and merge to retain the efforts of all
>> of
>> > >> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> contributors.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> If
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> there's some git maintenance that can trim it down
>> from
>> > >> 700+
>> > >> > > > > commits
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> then
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> maybe that's a compromise.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 21:23 Naveen Swamy <
>> > >> > mnnaveen@gmail.com
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> this PR comes from more than 1 individual, if we
>> > squash
>> > >> > merge
>> > >> > > > > we'll
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> be
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> able to attribute the contribution of those
>> > individuals.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> +1 to rebase merge to preserve history
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi Chen <
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the main reason for a rebase merge is that
>> it
>> > >> > > preserves
>> > >> > > > > >> >> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commit
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> history of the MXNet.jl package contributors, and
>> > given
>> > >> > that
>> > >> > > > the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> project
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> has been evolved since 2015 and has always been a
>> > >> > > high-quality
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> language
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> module for MXNet.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> I think we should take an exception here to
>> preserve
>> > >> the
>> > >> > > > commit
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> history
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> of
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each individual contributors to the Julia binding
>> and
>> > >> > > welcome
>> > >> > > > > >> >> them
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> community.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Tianqi
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi Chen <
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> In this particular case, I would suggest rebase
>> and
>> > >> > merge.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> The main reasoning is that the commit log of the
>> > Julia
>> > >> > > > binding
>> > >> > > > > >> >> is
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> not
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> simple WIP commits, every commit there has been
>> done
>> > >> > > through
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> testcases
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> it is important for us to respect the developer
>> of
>> > the
>> > >> > > > effort.
>> > >> > > > > >> >> It
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> is
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> also
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good to trace back the history of the commits
>> more
>> > >> > easily.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Tianqi
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin Meier <
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> carinmeier@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Chiyuan,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the prompt to find some clarity of
>> the
>> > >> pros
>> > >> > and
>> > >> > > > > >> >> cons
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> of
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> each. I
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> think that will help drive us to the right
>> > decision.
>> > >> I
>> > >> > > think
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> some
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> of
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> those
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> reasons are the ones you listed. I will take a
>> stab
>> > >> > below
>> > >> > > at
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> outlining
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed any.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge*
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Pros* - It is the project standard
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          - It will provide one commit for the
>> > feature
>> > >> > and
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> lessen
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> need
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> for 700+ commits rebased on top of master.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>         - It is easier for a user to do git log
>> to
>> > >> > browse
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> and
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> see
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> what was features were added.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>  *Cons* - I don't know how github would handle
>> > >> squashing
>> > >> > > all
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> those
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commit
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> messages into one. Will it be too much?
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>            - You lose the granularity of the
>> > features
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> individual
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> commits
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge*
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit message
>> with
>> > >> one
>> > >> > > > > >> >> commit
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>          -  You do have the granularity of the
>> > >> > individual
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> features
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> of
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> commit
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> * Cons *- It is not the project standard
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>           - You have 700+ commits on top of
>> master
>> > >> that
>> > >> > > > might
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> be
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> harder
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> see the ones that went in right before. (like
>> > someone
>> > >> > > > browsing
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> commits)
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan Zhang <
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> pluskid@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify the pros and cons of the two
>> > >> > approaches?
>> > >> > > Is
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> main
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> concern here about logistics (e.g. preserving
>> the
>> > >> > history
>> > >> > > > of
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> original
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> repo and developments) or technical issue (e.g.
>> > >> using
>> > >> > > > squash
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> might
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> end
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> up
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> with a huuuuge commit message that might be
>> > >> difficult
>> > >> > or
>> > >> > > > > >> >> hard
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> to
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> handle)?
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I think it might not be very likely that
>> someone
>> > is
>> > >> > going
>> > >> > > > to
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> cherry
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> pick
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> revert some of the commits. But preserving the
>> > >> commit
>> > >> > > > > >> >> history
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> is
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> still
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> useful in case one need to trace the change or
>> > >> bisect
>> > >> > for
>> > >> > > > > >> >> some
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> regression
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> bugs, etc.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Just to provide some context: the PR actually
>> > >> contains
>> > >> > > 700+
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> commits,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> and it
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> dates back to 2015. The development of the
>> Julia
>> > >> > binding
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> started
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> in
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> early stage of MXNet. We started with a
>> separate
>> > >> repo
>> > >> > due
>> > >> > > > to
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> the
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> requirement of the package system of julia.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Chiyuan
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin Meier <
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>> carinmeier@gmail.com
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The Import Julia binding PR ,(
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149
>> > >> > ),
>> > >> > > is
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> getting
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> very
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> close to being merged. Because of the large
>> > number
>> > >> of
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> commits
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> there
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> was a
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> suggestion not to use the usual "Squash and
>> > Merge".
>> > >> > The
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> only
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>> option
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> would
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be "Rebase and Merge" since merging with a
>> merge
>> > >> > commit
>> > >> > > is
>> > >> > > > > >> >>> not
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> enabled
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> for
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the project.
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Squash and Merge* - The commits from this
>> branch
>> > >> will
>> > >> > > be
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> into
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> one
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> commit in the base branch (With all the commit
>> > >> > messages
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> combined)
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from this
>> branch
>> > >> will
>> > >> > > be
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>> rebased
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> and
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> added
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> to the base branch
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The PR is over 250+ commits (Github won't show
>> > all
>> > >> of
>> > >> > > > > >> >> them)
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts about how we should handle the merge?
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Carin
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>>
>> > >> > > > > >> >>
>> > >> > > > > >>
>> > >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>