You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hive.apache.org by Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <jc...@apache.org> on 2018/05/15 05:44:40 UTC
[VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive. The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing under the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from testing infra before committing.
As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
Please, share your thoughts about this.
Here is my +1.
Thanks,
Jesús
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Кривенко Ігор <kr...@gmail.com>.
+1 for stricter commit guidelines.
I faced with some flaky tests. Mainly, it is TestTezPerfCliTests and some
of LlapLocalCliDriver.
Thanks, Igor.
On Thu, May 17, 2018, 22:54 Mithun RK <my...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bq. run tests on 10 “noop" patches
>
> Good idea, I think. I've upped NOOP patches on some of my JIRAs before,
> only to establish the "acceptable" baseline of failing tests. One problem
> was that failing-tests tended to change over time, so this needed
> repeating.:/
>
> The tighter commit rules are a welcome change.
>
> Mithun
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 12:31 PM Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I am actually hitting all kinds of test failures clearly unrelated to my
> > patches now…
> > Should we create 10 jiras and run tests on 10 “noop" patches to find
> which
> > tests are flaky?
> >
> > On 18/5/16, 22:58, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > >The vote passes with 19 +1s. Thanks for voting and supporting the
> > >initiative, it has been encouraging to see this reaction from the
> > >community.
> > >
> > >I have changed the committers guide as agreed [2]. We do not have
> > >consistent clean runs yet, hence we have more work ahead. Please, get
> > >involved identifying and fixing those flaky tests so we can move to
> > >normal development speed as soon as possible.
> > >
> > >From now on, no commits should happen without a clean run, every
> > >committer should enforce this policy.
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >-Jesús
> > >
> > >
> > >On 5/16/18, 3:58 PM, "Mithun RK" <my...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com>
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <sseth@apache.org
> >
> > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > > > > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
> > >failing
> > > > > > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote
> to
> > >gather
> > > > > > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
> > >patches to
> > > > Hive.
> > > > > > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
> > >obtained
> > > > > > before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> > >committing
> > > > > under
> > > > > > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as
> good
> > >as
> > > > having
> > > > > > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the
> +1
> > >from
> > > > > > testing infra before committing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> > >testing
> > > > infra
> > > > > > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and
> > >2) we
> > > > will
> > > > > > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
> > >testing
> > > > > > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
> > >are not
> > > > > > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is my +1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jesús
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > > > > > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > > > > > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Mithun RK <my...@gmail.com>.
bq. run tests on 10 “noop" patches
Good idea, I think. I've upped NOOP patches on some of my JIRAs before,
only to establish the "acceptable" baseline of failing tests. One problem
was that failing-tests tended to change over time, so this needed
repeating.:/
The tighter commit rules are a welcome change.
Mithun
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 12:31 PM Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:
> I am actually hitting all kinds of test failures clearly unrelated to my
> patches now…
> Should we create 10 jiras and run tests on 10 “noop" patches to find which
> tests are flaky?
>
> On 18/5/16, 22:58, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >The vote passes with 19 +1s. Thanks for voting and supporting the
> >initiative, it has been encouraging to see this reaction from the
> >community.
> >
> >I have changed the committers guide as agreed [2]. We do not have
> >consistent clean runs yet, hence we have more work ahead. Please, get
> >involved identifying and fixing those flaky tests so we can move to
> >normal development speed as soon as possible.
> >
> >From now on, no commits should happen without a clean run, every
> >committer should enforce this policy.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >-Jesús
> >
> >
> >On 5/16/18, 3:58 PM, "Mithun RK" <my...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org>
> >wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > > > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
> >failing
> > > > > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
> >gather
> > > > > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
> >patches to
> > > Hive.
> > > > > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
> >obtained
> > > > > before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> >committing
> > > > under
> > > > > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good
> >as
> > > having
> > > > > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
> >from
> > > > > testing infra before committing.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> >testing
> > > infra
> > > > > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and
> >2) we
> > > will
> > > > > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
> >testing
> > > > > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
> >are not
> > > > > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is my +1.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Jesús
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > > > > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > > > >
> > > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > > > > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20tex
t%20~%20%22%5C%22NOOP%20jira%5C%22%22
Anything that fails on these JIRAs should be fixed or disabled :)
On 18/5/17, 12:32, "Sergey Shelukhin" <se...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>Let me just do that...
>
>On 18/5/17, 12:31, "Sergey Shelukhin" <se...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
>>I am actually hitting all kinds of test failures clearly unrelated to my
>>patches now…
>>Should we create 10 jiras and run tests on 10 “noop" patches to find
>>which
>>tests are flaky?
>>
>>On 18/5/16, 22:58, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>The vote passes with 19 +1s. Thanks for voting and supporting the
>>>initiative, it has been encouraging to see this reaction from the
>>>community.
>>>
>>>I have changed the committers guide as agreed [2]. We do not have
>>>consistent clean runs yet, hence we have more work ahead. Please, get
>>>involved identifying and fixing those flaky tests so we can move to
>>>normal development speed as soon as possible.
>>>
>>>From now on, no commits should happen without a clean run, every
>>>committer should enforce this policy.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>-Jesús
>>>
>>>
>>>On 5/16/18, 3:58 PM, "Mithun RK" <my...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org>
>>>wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > +1
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
>>> > > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
>>>failing
>>> > > > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote
>>>to
>>>gather
>>> > > > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
>>>patches to
>>> > Hive.
>>> > > > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
>>>obtained
>>> > > > before committing, but there is another clause that allows
>>>committing
>>> > > under
>>> > > > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as
>>>good
>>>as
>>> > having
>>> > > > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the
>>>+1
>>>from
>>> > > > testing infra before committing.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
>>>testing
>>> > infra
>>> > > > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and
>>>2) we
>>> > will
>>> > > > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
>>>testing
>>> > > > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
>>>are not
>>> > > > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Please, share your thoughts about this.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Here is my +1.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Jesús
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
>>> > > > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>>> > > >
>>> > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
>>> > > > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>.
Let me just do that...
On 18/5/17, 12:31, "Sergey Shelukhin" <se...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>I am actually hitting all kinds of test failures clearly unrelated to my
>patches now…
>Should we create 10 jiras and run tests on 10 “noop" patches to find which
>tests are flaky?
>
>On 18/5/16, 22:58, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>The vote passes with 19 +1s. Thanks for voting and supporting the
>>initiative, it has been encouraging to see this reaction from the
>>community.
>>
>>I have changed the committers guide as agreed [2]. We do not have
>>consistent clean runs yet, hence we have more work ahead. Please, get
>>involved identifying and fixing those flaky tests so we can move to
>>normal development speed as soon as possible.
>>
>>From now on, no commits should happen without a clean run, every
>>committer should enforce this policy.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>-Jesús
>>
>>
>>On 5/16/18, 3:58 PM, "Mithun RK" <my...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>> > +1
>> >
>> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org>
>>wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
>> > > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
>>failing
>> > > > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
>>gather
>> > > > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
>>patches to
>> > Hive.
>> > > > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
>>obtained
>> > > > before committing, but there is another clause that allows
>>committing
>> > > under
>> > > > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good
>>as
>> > having
>> > > > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
>>from
>> > > > testing infra before committing.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
>>testing
>> > infra
>> > > > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and
>>2) we
>> > will
>> > > > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
>>testing
>> > > > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
>>are not
>> > > > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Please, share your thoughts about this.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Here is my +1.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > >
>> > > > Jesús
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
>> > > > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>> > > >
>> > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
>> > > > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>.
I am actually hitting all kinds of test failures clearly unrelated to my
patches now…
Should we create 10 jiras and run tests on 10 “noop" patches to find which
tests are flaky?
On 18/5/16, 22:58, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>The vote passes with 19 +1s. Thanks for voting and supporting the
>initiative, it has been encouraging to see this reaction from the
>community.
>
>I have changed the committers guide as agreed [2]. We do not have
>consistent clean runs yet, hence we have more work ahead. Please, get
>involved identifying and fixing those flaky tests so we can move to
>normal development speed as soon as possible.
>
>From now on, no commits should happen without a clean run, every
>committer should enforce this policy.
>
>Thanks,
>-Jesús
>
>
>On 5/16/18, 3:58 PM, "Mithun RK" <my...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com>
>wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org>
>wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
>failing
> > > > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
>gather
> > > > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
>patches to
> > Hive.
> > > > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
>obtained
> > > > before committing, but there is another clause that allows
>committing
> > > under
> > > > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good
>as
> > having
> > > > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
>from
> > > > testing infra before committing.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
>testing
> > infra
> > > > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and
>2) we
> > will
> > > > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
>testing
> > > > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
>are not
> > > > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Here is my +1.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Jesús
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > > > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > > >
> > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > > > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <jc...@apache.org>.
The vote passes with 19 +1s. Thanks for voting and supporting the initiative, it has been encouraging to see this reaction from the community.
I have changed the committers guide as agreed [2]. We do not have consistent clean runs yet, hence we have more work ahead. Please, get involved identifying and fixing those flaky tests so we can move to normal development speed as soon as possible.
From now on, no commits should happen without a clean run, every committer should enforce this policy.
Thanks,
-Jesús
On 5/16/18, 3:58 PM, "Mithun RK" <my...@gmail.com> wrote:
+1
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> > > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> > > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to
> Hive.
> > > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> > > before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
> > under
> > > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as
> having
> > > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> > > testing infra before committing.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing
> infra
> > > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we
> will
> > > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> > > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> > > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Here is my +1.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jesús
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > >
> > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Mithun RK <my...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> > > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> > > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to
> Hive.
> > > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> > > before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
> > under
> > > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as
> having
> > > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> > > testing infra before committing.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing
> infra
> > > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we
> will
> > > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> > > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> > > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Here is my +1.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jesús
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > >
> > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Yongzhi Chen <yc...@cloudera.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive.
> > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> > before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
> under
> > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having
> > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> > testing infra before committing.
> >
> >
> >
> > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra
> > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will
> > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is my +1.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jesús
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> >
> > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Siddharth Seth <ss...@apache.org>.
+1
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive.
> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing under
> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having
> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> testing infra before committing.
>
>
>
> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra
> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will
> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>
>
>
> Please, share your thoughts about this.
>
>
>
> Here is my +1.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jesús
>
>
>
> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>
> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Thejas Nair <th...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez
<jc...@apache.org> wrote:
> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive. The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing under the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from testing infra before committing.
>
>
>
> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>
>
>
> Please, share your thoughts about this.
>
>
>
> Here is my +1.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jesús
>
>
>
> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>
> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Vihang Karajgaonkar <vi...@cloudera.com>.
+1 Default retry on failing test should help. Another way to identify test
issues is to run them in the same batch as being run in the precommit job.
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Deepak Jaiswal <dj...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:
> +1
>
> On 5/15/18, 4:06 PM, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> That is already part of the policy although it apparently remained
> unnoticed:
>
> *If a commit introduces new test failures, the preferred process is to
> revert the patch, rather than opening a new JIRA to fix the new failures.*
>
> It can be reworded to be stricter... But in any case, we should all
> enforce it from now on.
>
> -Jesús
>
>
> On 5/15/18, 3:55 PM, "Sergey Shelukhin" <se...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> +1. Can we also add something about revert-first policy if some
> patch
> breaks tests?
> So that it’s ok to revert if the tests aren’t fixed quickly with a
> follow-up.
>
> On 18/5/15, 13:08, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> >I was hoping that by being stricter, we are going to make an
> effort to
> >fix the flaky
> >tests. The reason is precisely what you mention: if you cannot
> commit,
> >you need
> >to fix this situation. That is what I meant with providing an
> additional
> >incentive to
> >make testing more robust: currently there is no incentive. I do
> not think
> >that
> >improving tests is a responsibility of a single developer, but
> rather a
> >responsibility
> >of all of us. Disabling the tests is a one-time solution to get
> to a
> >clean run, trying to
> >accelerate the process to get to it, as we did not want to block
> >development for
> >weeks. Then flaky tests should just not go in, and if they do, we
> can
> >just revert
> >the patch (this is what [2] says btw).
> >
> >The first thing we need to do is identifying why a test is flaky.
> After
> >examining runs
> >for the last few days, I saw many of them fall in following
> categories:
> >- Many of them are flaky because of estimations such as data
> size. One
> >possible
> >solution is to mask data size for those tests, as we already mask
> some
> >environment
> >dependent information.
> >- Some of them are flaky because environment issues, e.g., I see
> this a
> >lot with
> >TestTriggersMoveWorkloadManager. If their logic cannot be
> rewritten, a
> >possible
> >solution is to add a max number of retries selectively for those
> tests
> >(surefire has
> >a rerunFailingTestsCount option that I am not familiar with),
> expecting
> >that they
> >pass at least once.
> >
> >Not sure if you have other ideas?
> >
> >-Jesús
> >
> >
> >On 5/15/18, 11:59 AM, "Vihang Karajgaonkar" <vi...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Can we also define a standard process to identify a flaky
> test and
> >thereby
> > making it eligible to be disabled? I am worried that the
> intermittent
> >the
> > flaky ones will stall the patches when we restart allowing the
> >commits.
> >
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Vineet Garg <
> vgarg@hortonworks.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > > On May 15, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Alan Gates <
> alanfgates@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1.
> > > >
> > > > Alan.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena
> ><se...@cloudera.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
> > > >> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> +1
> > > >>> ________________________________________
> > > >>> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> > > >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> > > >>> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> > > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
> > > >>>
> > > >>> +1
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <
> takiar.sahil@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> +1
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <
> > > owen.omalley@gmail.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary
> ><pv...@cloudera.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long
> while! Thanks
> >for
> > > >>> taking
> > > >>>>>> this up all!
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho
> Rodriguez <
> > > >>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original
> >message.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than
> usual,
> >for
> > > >>> instance
> > > >>>>>> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation
> can only
> >get
> > > >> worse
> > > >>>>> than
> > > >>>>>> it is now if we do not take action for a longer
> period.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy
> majority
> >(at
> > > >>> least 3
> > > >>>>>> votes, more +1s than -1s).
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>> Jesús
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman"
> ><as...@cloudera.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li
> ><li...@gmail.com>
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth
> Jayachandran <
> > > >>>>>>>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks
> > > >>>>>>>>> Prasanth
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus
> Camacho
> > > >> Rodriguez"
> > > >>> <
> > > >>>>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>>
> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the
> tests that
> >were
> > > >>>>> failing
> > > >>>>>>>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to
> start this
> >vote to
> > > >>>>> gather
> > > >>>>>>>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt
> committing
> >patches
> > > >>> to
> > > >>>>>> Hive.
> > > >>>>>>>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a
> +1
> >should be
> > > >>>>> obtained
> > > >>>>>>>>> before committing, but there is another clause
> that allows
> > > >>> committing
> > > >>>>>>>> under
> > > >>>>>>>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky
> tests are
> >as good
> > > >> as
> > > >>>>>> having
> > > >>>>>>>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and
> enforce
> >the +1
> > > >>> from
> > > >>>>>>>>> testing infra before committing.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1
> from the
> > > >> testing
> > > >>>>>> infra
> > > >>>>>>>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable
> project,
> >and 2)
> > > >>> we
> > > >>>>>> will
> > > >>>>>>>>> have another incentive as a community to create a
> more
> >robust
> > > >>> testing
> > > >>>>>>>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar
> unit tests
> >that
> > > >> are
> > > >>>>> not
> > > >>>>>>>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests,
> etc.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Jes?s
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> [1]
> >http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/
> confluence/display/Hive/
> > > >>>>>>>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,
> andcommittingpatches
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>> Best regards!
> > > >>>>>>>> Rui Li
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> --
> > > >>>> Sahil Takiar
> > > >>>> Software Engineer
> > > >>>> takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Deepak Jaiswal <dj...@hortonworks.com>.
+1
On 5/15/18, 4:06 PM, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
That is already part of the policy although it apparently remained unnoticed:
*If a commit introduces new test failures, the preferred process is to revert the patch, rather than opening a new JIRA to fix the new failures.*
It can be reworded to be stricter... But in any case, we should all enforce it from now on.
-Jesús
On 5/15/18, 3:55 PM, "Sergey Shelukhin" <se...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
+1. Can we also add something about revert-first policy if some patch
breaks tests?
So that it’s ok to revert if the tests aren’t fixed quickly with a
follow-up.
On 18/5/15, 13:08, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>I was hoping that by being stricter, we are going to make an effort to
>fix the flaky
>tests. The reason is precisely what you mention: if you cannot commit,
>you need
>to fix this situation. That is what I meant with providing an additional
>incentive to
>make testing more robust: currently there is no incentive. I do not think
>that
>improving tests is a responsibility of a single developer, but rather a
>responsibility
>of all of us. Disabling the tests is a one-time solution to get to a
>clean run, trying to
>accelerate the process to get to it, as we did not want to block
>development for
>weeks. Then flaky tests should just not go in, and if they do, we can
>just revert
>the patch (this is what [2] says btw).
>
>The first thing we need to do is identifying why a test is flaky. After
>examining runs
>for the last few days, I saw many of them fall in following categories:
>- Many of them are flaky because of estimations such as data size. One
>possible
>solution is to mask data size for those tests, as we already mask some
>environment
>dependent information.
>- Some of them are flaky because environment issues, e.g., I see this a
>lot with
>TestTriggersMoveWorkloadManager. If their logic cannot be rewritten, a
>possible
>solution is to add a max number of retries selectively for those tests
>(surefire has
>a rerunFailingTestsCount option that I am not familiar with), expecting
>that they
>pass at least once.
>
>Not sure if you have other ideas?
>
>-Jesús
>
>
>On 5/15/18, 11:59 AM, "Vihang Karajgaonkar" <vi...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> Can we also define a standard process to identify a flaky test and
>thereby
> making it eligible to be disabled? I am worried that the intermittent
>the
> flaky ones will stall the patches when we restart allowing the
>commits.
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Vineet Garg <vg...@hortonworks.com>
>wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > > On May 15, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
> > >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > > Alan.
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena
><se...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
> > >> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>> ________________________________________
> > >>> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> > >>> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
> > >>>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <
> > owen.omalley@gmail.com
> > >>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary
><pv...@cloudera.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks
>for
> > >>> taking
> > >>>>>> this up all!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > >>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original
>message.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual,
>for
> > >>> instance
> > >>>>>> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only
>get
> > >> worse
> > >>>>> than
> > >>>>>> it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority
>(at
> > >>> least 3
> > >>>>>> votes, more +1s than -1s).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>> Jesús
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman"
><as...@cloudera.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li
><li...@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> > >>>>>>>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks
> > >>>>>>>>> Prasanth
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho
> > >> Rodriguez"
> > >>> <
> > >>>>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that
>were
> > >>>>> failing
> > >>>>>>>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this
>vote to
> > >>>>> gather
> > >>>>>>>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
>patches
> > >>> to
> > >>>>>> Hive.
> > >>>>>>>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1
>should be
> > >>>>> obtained
> > >>>>>>>>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> > >>> committing
> > >>>>>>>> under
> > >>>>>>>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are
>as good
> > >> as
> > >>>>>> having
> > >>>>>>>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce
>the +1
> > >>> from
> > >>>>>>>>> testing infra before committing.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> > >> testing
> > >>>>>> infra
> > >>>>>>>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project,
>and 2)
> > >>> we
> > >>>>>> will
> > >>>>>>>>> have another incentive as a community to create a more
>robust
> > >>> testing
> > >>>>>>>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests
>that
> > >> are
> > >>>>> not
> > >>>>>>>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Jes?s
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> [1]
>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > >>>>>>>>>
>mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > >>>>>>>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>> Best regards!
> > >>>>>>>> Rui Li
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Sahil Takiar
> > >>>> Software Engineer
> > >>>> takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <jc...@apache.org>.
That is already part of the policy although it apparently remained unnoticed:
*If a commit introduces new test failures, the preferred process is to revert the patch, rather than opening a new JIRA to fix the new failures.*
It can be reworded to be stricter... But in any case, we should all enforce it from now on.
-Jesús
On 5/15/18, 3:55 PM, "Sergey Shelukhin" <se...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
+1. Can we also add something about revert-first policy if some patch
breaks tests?
So that it’s ok to revert if the tests aren’t fixed quickly with a
follow-up.
On 18/5/15, 13:08, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>I was hoping that by being stricter, we are going to make an effort to
>fix the flaky
>tests. The reason is precisely what you mention: if you cannot commit,
>you need
>to fix this situation. That is what I meant with providing an additional
>incentive to
>make testing more robust: currently there is no incentive. I do not think
>that
>improving tests is a responsibility of a single developer, but rather a
>responsibility
>of all of us. Disabling the tests is a one-time solution to get to a
>clean run, trying to
>accelerate the process to get to it, as we did not want to block
>development for
>weeks. Then flaky tests should just not go in, and if they do, we can
>just revert
>the patch (this is what [2] says btw).
>
>The first thing we need to do is identifying why a test is flaky. After
>examining runs
>for the last few days, I saw many of them fall in following categories:
>- Many of them are flaky because of estimations such as data size. One
>possible
>solution is to mask data size for those tests, as we already mask some
>environment
>dependent information.
>- Some of them are flaky because environment issues, e.g., I see this a
>lot with
>TestTriggersMoveWorkloadManager. If their logic cannot be rewritten, a
>possible
>solution is to add a max number of retries selectively for those tests
>(surefire has
>a rerunFailingTestsCount option that I am not familiar with), expecting
>that they
>pass at least once.
>
>Not sure if you have other ideas?
>
>-Jesús
>
>
>On 5/15/18, 11:59 AM, "Vihang Karajgaonkar" <vi...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> Can we also define a standard process to identify a flaky test and
>thereby
> making it eligible to be disabled? I am worried that the intermittent
>the
> flaky ones will stall the patches when we restart allowing the
>commits.
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Vineet Garg <vg...@hortonworks.com>
>wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > > On May 15, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
> > >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > > Alan.
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena
><se...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
> > >> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>> ________________________________________
> > >>> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> > >>> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
> > >>>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <
> > owen.omalley@gmail.com
> > >>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary
><pv...@cloudera.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks
>for
> > >>> taking
> > >>>>>> this up all!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > >>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original
>message.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual,
>for
> > >>> instance
> > >>>>>> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only
>get
> > >> worse
> > >>>>> than
> > >>>>>> it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority
>(at
> > >>> least 3
> > >>>>>> votes, more +1s than -1s).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>> Jesús
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman"
><as...@cloudera.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li
><li...@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> > >>>>>>>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks
> > >>>>>>>>> Prasanth
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho
> > >> Rodriguez"
> > >>> <
> > >>>>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that
>were
> > >>>>> failing
> > >>>>>>>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this
>vote to
> > >>>>> gather
> > >>>>>>>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
>patches
> > >>> to
> > >>>>>> Hive.
> > >>>>>>>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1
>should be
> > >>>>> obtained
> > >>>>>>>>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> > >>> committing
> > >>>>>>>> under
> > >>>>>>>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are
>as good
> > >> as
> > >>>>>> having
> > >>>>>>>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce
>the +1
> > >>> from
> > >>>>>>>>> testing infra before committing.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> > >> testing
> > >>>>>> infra
> > >>>>>>>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project,
>and 2)
> > >>> we
> > >>>>>> will
> > >>>>>>>>> have another incentive as a community to create a more
>robust
> > >>> testing
> > >>>>>>>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests
>that
> > >> are
> > >>>>> not
> > >>>>>>>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Jes?s
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> [1]
>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > >>>>>>>>>
>mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > >>>>>>>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>> Best regards!
> > >>>>>>>> Rui Li
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Sahil Takiar
> > >>>> Software Engineer
> > >>>> takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>.
+1. Can we also add something about revert-first policy if some patch
breaks tests?
So that it’s ok to revert if the tests aren’t fixed quickly with a
follow-up.
On 18/5/15, 13:08, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>I was hoping that by being stricter, we are going to make an effort to
>fix the flaky
>tests. The reason is precisely what you mention: if you cannot commit,
>you need
>to fix this situation. That is what I meant with providing an additional
>incentive to
>make testing more robust: currently there is no incentive. I do not think
>that
>improving tests is a responsibility of a single developer, but rather a
>responsibility
>of all of us. Disabling the tests is a one-time solution to get to a
>clean run, trying to
>accelerate the process to get to it, as we did not want to block
>development for
>weeks. Then flaky tests should just not go in, and if they do, we can
>just revert
>the patch (this is what [2] says btw).
>
>The first thing we need to do is identifying why a test is flaky. After
>examining runs
>for the last few days, I saw many of them fall in following categories:
>- Many of them are flaky because of estimations such as data size. One
>possible
>solution is to mask data size for those tests, as we already mask some
>environment
>dependent information.
>- Some of them are flaky because environment issues, e.g., I see this a
>lot with
>TestTriggersMoveWorkloadManager. If their logic cannot be rewritten, a
>possible
>solution is to add a max number of retries selectively for those tests
>(surefire has
>a rerunFailingTestsCount option that I am not familiar with), expecting
>that they
>pass at least once.
>
>Not sure if you have other ideas?
>
>-Jesús
>
>
>On 5/15/18, 11:59 AM, "Vihang Karajgaonkar" <vi...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> Can we also define a standard process to identify a flaky test and
>thereby
> making it eligible to be disabled? I am worried that the intermittent
>the
> flaky ones will stall the patches when we restart allowing the
>commits.
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Vineet Garg <vg...@hortonworks.com>
>wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > > On May 15, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
> > >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > > Alan.
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena
><se...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
> > >> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>> ________________________________________
> > >>> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> > >>> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
> > >>>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <
> > owen.omalley@gmail.com
> > >>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary
><pv...@cloudera.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks
>for
> > >>> taking
> > >>>>>> this up all!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > >>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original
>message.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual,
>for
> > >>> instance
> > >>>>>> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only
>get
> > >> worse
> > >>>>> than
> > >>>>>> it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority
>(at
> > >>> least 3
> > >>>>>> votes, more +1s than -1s).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>> Jesús
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman"
><as...@cloudera.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li
><li...@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> > >>>>>>>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks
> > >>>>>>>>> Prasanth
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho
> > >> Rodriguez"
> > >>> <
> > >>>>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that
>were
> > >>>>> failing
> > >>>>>>>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this
>vote to
> > >>>>> gather
> > >>>>>>>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing
>patches
> > >>> to
> > >>>>>> Hive.
> > >>>>>>>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1
>should be
> > >>>>> obtained
> > >>>>>>>>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> > >>> committing
> > >>>>>>>> under
> > >>>>>>>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are
>as good
> > >> as
> > >>>>>> having
> > >>>>>>>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce
>the +1
> > >>> from
> > >>>>>>>>> testing infra before committing.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> > >> testing
> > >>>>>> infra
> > >>>>>>>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project,
>and 2)
> > >>> we
> > >>>>>> will
> > >>>>>>>>> have another incentive as a community to create a more
>robust
> > >>> testing
> > >>>>>>>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests
>that
> > >> are
> > >>>>> not
> > >>>>>>>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Jes?s
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> [1]
>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > >>>>>>>>>
>mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > >>>>>>>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>> Best regards!
> > >>>>>>>> Rui Li
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Sahil Takiar
> > >>>> Software Engineer
> > >>>> takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <jc...@apache.org>.
I was hoping that by being stricter, we are going to make an effort to fix the flaky
tests. The reason is precisely what you mention: if you cannot commit, you need
to fix this situation. That is what I meant with providing an additional incentive to
make testing more robust: currently there is no incentive. I do not think that
improving tests is a responsibility of a single developer, but rather a responsibility
of all of us. Disabling the tests is a one-time solution to get to a clean run, trying to
accelerate the process to get to it, as we did not want to block development for
weeks. Then flaky tests should just not go in, and if they do, we can just revert
the patch (this is what [2] says btw).
The first thing we need to do is identifying why a test is flaky. After examining runs
for the last few days, I saw many of them fall in following categories:
- Many of them are flaky because of estimations such as data size. One possible
solution is to mask data size for those tests, as we already mask some environment
dependent information.
- Some of them are flaky because environment issues, e.g., I see this a lot with
TestTriggersMoveWorkloadManager. If their logic cannot be rewritten, a possible
solution is to add a max number of retries selectively for those tests (surefire has
a rerunFailingTestsCount option that I am not familiar with), expecting that they
pass at least once.
Not sure if you have other ideas?
-Jesús
On 5/15/18, 11:59 AM, "Vihang Karajgaonkar" <vi...@cloudera.com> wrote:
Can we also define a standard process to identify a flaky test and thereby
making it eligible to be disabled? I am worried that the intermittent the
flaky ones will stall the patches when we restart allowing the commits.
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Vineet Garg <vg...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> > On May 15, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1.
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena <se...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
> >> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>> ________________________________________
> >>> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> >>> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
> >>>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <
> owen.omalley@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for
> >>> taking
> >>>>>> this up all!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> >>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for
> >>> instance
> >>>>>> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get
> >> worse
> >>>>> than
> >>>>>> it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at
> >>> least 3
> >>>>>> votes, more +1s than -1s).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Jesús
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> >>>>>>>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>>> Prasanth
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho
> >> Rodriguez"
> >>> <
> >>>>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
> >>>>> failing
> >>>>>>>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
> >>>>> gather
> >>>>>>>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches
> >>> to
> >>>>>> Hive.
> >>>>>>>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
> >>>>> obtained
> >>>>>>>>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> >>> committing
> >>>>>>>> under
> >>>>>>>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good
> >> as
> >>>>>> having
> >>>>>>>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
> >>> from
> >>>>>>>>> testing infra before committing.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> >> testing
> >>>>>> infra
> >>>>>>>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2)
> >>> we
> >>>>>> will
> >>>>>>>>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
> >>> testing
> >>>>>>>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
> >> are
> >>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Jes?s
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> >>>>>>>>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> >>>>>>>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Best regards!
> >>>>>>>> Rui Li
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Sahil Takiar
> >>>> Software Engineer
> >>>> takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Vihang Karajgaonkar <vi...@cloudera.com>.
Can we also define a standard process to identify a flaky test and thereby
making it eligible to be disabled? I am worried that the intermittent the
flaky ones will stall the patches when we restart allowing the commits.
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Vineet Garg <vg...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> > On May 15, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1.
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena <se...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
> >> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>> ________________________________________
> >>> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> >>> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
> >>>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <
> owen.omalley@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for
> >>> taking
> >>>>>> this up all!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> >>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for
> >>> instance
> >>>>>> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get
> >> worse
> >>>>> than
> >>>>>> it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at
> >>> least 3
> >>>>>> votes, more +1s than -1s).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Jesús
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> >>>>>>>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>>> Prasanth
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho
> >> Rodriguez"
> >>> <
> >>>>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
> >>>>> failing
> >>>>>>>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
> >>>>> gather
> >>>>>>>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches
> >>> to
> >>>>>> Hive.
> >>>>>>>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
> >>>>> obtained
> >>>>>>>>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> >>> committing
> >>>>>>>> under
> >>>>>>>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good
> >> as
> >>>>>> having
> >>>>>>>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
> >>> from
> >>>>>>>>> testing infra before committing.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> >> testing
> >>>>>> infra
> >>>>>>>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2)
> >>> we
> >>>>>> will
> >>>>>>>>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
> >>> testing
> >>>>>>>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
> >> are
> >>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Jes?s
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> >>>>>>>>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> >>>>>>>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Best regards!
> >>>>>>>> Rui Li
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Sahil Takiar
> >>>> Software Engineer
> >>>> takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Vineet Garg <vg...@hortonworks.com>.
+1
> On May 15, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1.
>
> Alan.
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena <se...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
>> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
>>> To: dev@hive.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <owen.omalley@gmail.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for
>>> taking
>>>>>> this up all!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for
>>> instance
>>>>>> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get
>> worse
>>>>> than
>>>>>> it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at
>>> least 3
>>>>>> votes, more +1s than -1s).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Jesús
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
>>>>>>>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>> Prasanth
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho
>> Rodriguez"
>>> <
>>>>>>>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
>>>>> failing
>>>>>>>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
>>>>> gather
>>>>>>>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches
>>> to
>>>>>> Hive.
>>>>>>>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
>>>>> obtained
>>>>>>>>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
>>> committing
>>>>>>>> under
>>>>>>>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good
>> as
>>>>>> having
>>>>>>>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
>>> from
>>>>>>>>> testing infra before committing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
>> testing
>>>>>> infra
>>>>>>>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2)
>>> we
>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
>>> testing
>>>>>>>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
>> are
>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here is my +1.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jes?s
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
>>>>>>>>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
>>>>>>>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best regards!
>>>>>>>> Rui Li
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sahil Takiar
>>>> Software Engineer
>>>> takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com>.
+1.
Alan.
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Sergio Pena <se...@cloudera.com>
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
> ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> > To: dev@hive.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >+1
> > >
> > >On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <owen.omalley@gmail.com
> >
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for
> > taking
> > >> > this up all!
> > >> >
> > >> > > On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > >> > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for
> > instance
> > >> > 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get
> worse
> > >> than
> > >> > it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at
> > least 3
> > >> > votes, more +1s than -1s).
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks,
> > >> > > Jesús
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > +1
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> +1
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> > >> > >> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>> +1
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Thanks
> > >> > >>> Prasanth
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho
> Rodriguez"
> > <
> > >> > >>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
> > >> failing
> > >> > >>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
> > >> gather
> > >> > >>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches
> > to
> > >> > Hive.
> > >> > >>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
> > >> obtained
> > >> > >>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> > committing
> > >> > >> under
> > >> > >>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good
> as
> > >> > having
> > >> > >>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
> > from
> > >> > >>> testing infra before committing.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the
> testing
> > >> > infra
> > >> > >>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2)
> > we
> > >> > will
> > >> > >>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
> > testing
> > >> > >>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that
> are
> > >> not
> > >> > >>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Here is my +1.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Thanks,
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Jes?s
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > >> > >>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > >> > >>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> --
> > >> > >> Best regards!
> > >> > >> Rui Li
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >Sahil Takiar
> > >Software Engineer
> > >takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Sergio Pena <se...@cloudera.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Gunther Hagleitner <
ghagleitner@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> +1
> ________________________________________
> From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
>
> +1
>
>
> On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >+1
> >
> >On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <ow...@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for
> taking
> >> > this up all!
> >> >
> >> > > On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> >> > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
> >> > >
> >> > > Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for
> instance
> >> > 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get worse
> >> than
> >> > it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> >> > >
> >> > > As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at
> least 3
> >> > votes, more +1s than -1s).
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Jesús
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > +1
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> +1
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> >> > >> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> +1
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Thanks
> >> > >>> Prasanth
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez"
> <
> >> > >>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
> >> failing
> >> > >>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
> >> gather
> >> > >>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches
> to
> >> > Hive.
> >> > >>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
> >> obtained
> >> > >>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows
> committing
> >> > >> under
> >> > >>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as
> >> > having
> >> > >>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1
> from
> >> > >>> testing infra before committing.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing
> >> > infra
> >> > >>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2)
> we
> >> > will
> >> > >>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust
> testing
> >> > >>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are
> >> not
> >> > >>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Here is my +1.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Thanks,
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Jes?s
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> >> > >>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> >> > >>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> --
> >> > >> Best regards!
> >> > >> Rui Li
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Sahil Takiar
> >Software Engineer
> >takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Gunther Hagleitner <gh...@hortonworks.com>.
+1
________________________________________
From: Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:03 AM
To: dev@hive.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
+1
On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>+1
>
>On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <ow...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for taking
>> > this up all!
>> >
>> > > On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
>> > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
>> > >
>> > > Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for instance
>> > 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get worse
>> than
>> > it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
>> > >
>> > > As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at least 3
>> > votes, more +1s than -1s).
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Jesús
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> +1
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
>> > >> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> +1
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Thanks
>> > >>> Prasanth
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
>> > >>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
>> failing
>> > >>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
>> gather
>> > >>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to
>> > Hive.
>> > >>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
>> obtained
>> > >>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
>> > >> under
>> > >>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as
>> > having
>> > >>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
>> > >>> testing infra before committing.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing
>> > infra
>> > >>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we
>> > will
>> > >>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
>> > >>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are
>> not
>> > >>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Here is my +1.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Thanks,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Jes?s
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
>> > >>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>> > >>>
>> > >>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
>> > >>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> Best regards!
>> > >> Rui Li
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Sahil Takiar
>Software Engineer
>takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Sankar Hariappan <sh...@hortonworks.com>.
+1
On 15/05/18, 9:30 PM, "Sahil Takiar" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>+1
>
>On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <ow...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for taking
>> > this up all!
>> >
>> > > On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
>> > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
>> > >
>> > > Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for instance
>> > 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get worse
>> than
>> > it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
>> > >
>> > > As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at least 3
>> > votes, more +1s than -1s).
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Jesús
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> +1
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
>> > >> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> +1
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Thanks
>> > >>> Prasanth
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
>> > >>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
>> failing
>> > >>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
>> gather
>> > >>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to
>> > Hive.
>> > >>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
>> obtained
>> > >>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
>> > >> under
>> > >>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as
>> > having
>> > >>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
>> > >>> testing infra before committing.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing
>> > infra
>> > >>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we
>> > will
>> > >>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
>> > >>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are
>> not
>> > >>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Here is my +1.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Thanks,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Jes?s
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
>> > >>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>> > >>>
>> > >>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
>> > >>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> Best regards!
>> > >> Rui Li
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Sahil Takiar
>Software Engineer
>takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Sahil Takiar <ta...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Owen O'Malley <ow...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for taking
> > this up all!
> >
> > > On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> > jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
> > >
> > > Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for instance
> > 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get worse
> than
> > it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> > >
> > > As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at least 3
> > votes, more +1s than -1s).
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jesús
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> > >> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>> Prasanth
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
> > >>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were
> failing
> > >>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to
> gather
> > >>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to
> > Hive.
> > >>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be
> obtained
> > >>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
> > >> under
> > >>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as
> > having
> > >>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> > >>> testing infra before committing.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing
> > infra
> > >>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we
> > will
> > >>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> > >>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are
> not
> > >>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Here is my +1.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>
> > >>> Jes?s
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > >>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> > >>>
> > >>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > >>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best regards!
> > >> Rui Li
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
Sahil Takiar
Software Engineer
takiar.sahil@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Owen O'Malley <ow...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> +1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for taking
> this up all!
>
> > On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <
> jcamacho@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
> >
> > Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for instance
> 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get worse than
> it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
> >
> > As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at least 3
> votes, more +1s than -1s).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jesús
> >
> >
> > On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> >> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Prasanth
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
> >>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> >>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> >>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to
> Hive.
> >>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> >>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
> >> under
> >>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as
> having
> >>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> >>> testing infra before committing.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing
> infra
> >>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we
> will
> >>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> >>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> >>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Here is my +1.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Jes?s
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> >>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> >>>
> >>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> >>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards!
> >> Rui Li
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com>.
+1 - Hoping for something like this for a long while! Thanks for taking this up all!
> On May 15, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <jc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
>
> Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for instance 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get worse than it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
>
> As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at least 3 votes, more +1s than -1s).
>
> Thanks,
> Jesús
>
>
> On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
>> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Prasanth
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
>>> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
>>> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
>>> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive.
>>> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
>>> before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
>> under
>>> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having
>>> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
>>> testing infra before committing.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra
>>> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will
>>> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
>>> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
>>> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please, share your thoughts about this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Here is my +1.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jes?s
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
>>> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>>>
>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
>>> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards!
>> Rui Li
>>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <jc...@apache.org>.
Forgot to mention the length of the vote in original message.
Let's leave the vote open for a shorter period than usual, for instance 48 hours, i.e., till Wednesday 10pm PST. Situation can only get worse than it is now if we do not take action for a longer period.
As Alan suggested, vote passes if there is a lazy majority (at least 3 votes, more +1s than -1s).
Thanks,
Jesús
On 5/15/18, 8:37 AM, "Andrew Sherman" <as...@cloudera.com> wrote:
+1
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > Prasanth
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
> > jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive.
> > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> > before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
> under
> > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having
> > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> > testing infra before committing.
> >
> >
> >
> > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra
> > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will
> > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is my +1.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jes?s
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> >
> > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards!
> Rui Li
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Andrew Sherman <as...@cloudera.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:34 AM Rui Li <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
> pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > Prasanth
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
> > jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> > consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> > support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive.
> > The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> > before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing
> under
> > the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having
> > no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> > testing infra before committing.
> >
> >
> >
> > As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra
> > before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will
> > have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> > infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> > flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please, share your thoughts about this.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is my +1.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jes?s
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> > mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
> >
> > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> > HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards!
> Rui Li
>
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Rui Li <li...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Prasanth Jayachandran <
pjayachandran@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> +1
>
>
>
> Thanks
> Prasanth
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <
> jcamacho@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
>
> After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing
> consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather
> support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive.
> The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained
> before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing under
> the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having
> no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from
> testing infra before committing.
>
>
>
> As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra
> before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will
> have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing
> infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not
> flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
>
>
>
> Please, share your thoughts about this.
>
>
>
> Here is my +1.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jes?s
>
>
>
> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.
> mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
>
> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/
> HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches
>
>
>
>
>
--
Best regards!
Rui Li
Re: [VOTE] Stricter commit guidelines
Posted by Prasanth Jayachandran <pj...@hortonworks.com>.
+1
Thanks
Prasanth
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:44 PM -0700, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jc...@apache.org>> wrote:
After work has been done to ignore most of the tests that were failing consistently/intermittently [1], I wanted to start this vote to gather support from the community to be stricter wrt committing patches to Hive. The committers guide [2] already specifies that a +1 should be obtained before committing, but there is another clause that allows committing under the presence of flaky tests (clause 4). Flaky tests are as good as having no tests, hence I propose to remove clause 4 and enforce the +1 from testing infra before committing.
As I see it, by enforcing that we always get a +1 from the testing infra before committing, 1) we will have a more stable project, and 2) we will have another incentive as a community to create a more robust testing infra, e.g., replacing flaky tests for similar unit tests that are not flaky, trying to decrease running time for tests, etc.
Please, share your thoughts about this.
Here is my +1.
Thanks,
Jes?s
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hive-dev/201805.mbox/%3C63023673-AEE5-41A9-BA52-5A5DFB2078B6%40apache.org%3E
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/HowToCommit#HowToCommit-PreCommitruns,andcommittingpatches