You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@phoenix.apache.org by Priyank Porwal <pr...@gmail.com> on 2019/06/21 07:15:14 UTC
[VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
[Converting this thread to a community vote]
I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
Things to note:
1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits are
pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
reports linked from the PR as well.
3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging the
PR.
4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several jobs,
but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration (one-time)
and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
Thanks,
Priyank
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
<td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis CI
> will automatically runs all the tests
> and post the results to the PR.
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
> would
> > be good.
> >
> > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our code
> > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
> > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
> >
> > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
> > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
> >
> > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation gotchas
> I'd
> > be a +1.
> >
> > Geoffrey
> >
> > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
> > [2] https://travis-ci.org/
> >
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <willshen@marinsoftware.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
> > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT) takes
> > > ~2h.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <tdsilva@salesforce.com
> > > > .invalid>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
> > > > contributors
> > > > > to run tests
> > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch doesn't
> > break
> > > > > functionality.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
> > > priyankporwal@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
> > > > > CodeCoverage
> > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and integration
> > tests
> > > > on
> > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
> checkstyle
> > > > checks
> > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of manual
> > patch
> > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into code
> > > health.
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Priyank
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
It's not inappropriate but I encourage the community to try for consensus
before voting.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 11:07 AM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> If the vote was inappropriate, my apologies -- it was my offline suggestion
> to Priyank to call one when he felt he was ready to proceed. There had been
> a general discussion on the list on the matter about a month ago that was
> generally supportive of the idea, but was preliminary and didn't seem broad
> enough for a big change to the development pipeline. I didn't want the
> discussion to take place on a JIRA or PR that many might miss.
>
> I suggested a vote as a forcing function to have a broader discussion that
> might not happen otherwise -- which is what happened.
>
> If there was a better approach more in keeping with the Apache Way, please
> let me know either here (maybe in a different thread) or offline. :-)
>
> Geoffrey
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:50 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Point of order Apache communities generally do not vote to achieve
> > consensus. That should be a last resort. Please do not vote to make these
> > kinds of decisions.
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM Priyank Porwal <priyankporwal@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > [Converting this thread to a community vote]
> > >
> > > I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
> > > success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
> > > https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
> > >
> > > Things to note:
> > > 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits
> > are
> > > pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
> > > 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
> > > produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
> > > reports linked from the PR as well.
> > > 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging
> > the
> > > PR.
> > > 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too
> long
> > > for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job
> is
> > > 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several
> > jobs,
> > > but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
> > > 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration
> > (one-time)
> > > and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular
> PR.
> > > Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
> > >
> > > Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and
> CodeCov.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Priyank
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
> > > <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis
> > CI
> > > > will automatically runs all the tests
> > > > and post the results to the PR.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like
> this
> > > > would
> > > > > be good.
> > > > >
> > > > > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our
> > code
> > > > > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with,
> so
> > > > > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
> > > > >
> > > > > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's
> home
> > > > > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
> > > > >
> > > > > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation
> > gotchas
> > > > I'd
> > > > > be a +1.
> > > > >
> > > > > Geoffrey
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
> > > > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <
> > > willshen@marinsoftware.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
> > > > > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT)
> > > takes
> > > > > > ~2h.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <
> > tdsilva@salesforce.com
> > > > > > > .invalid>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for
> new
> > > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > > to run tests
> > > > > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch
> > doesn't
> > > > > break
> > > > > > > > functionality.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
> > > > > > priyankporwal@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI
> and
> > > > > > > > CodeCoverage
> > > > > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and
> > integration
> > > > > tests
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
> > > > checkstyle
> > > > > > > checks
> > > > > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of
> > manual
> > > > > patch
> > > > > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into
> > code
> > > > > > health.
> > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Priyank
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>.
Andrew,
If the vote was inappropriate, my apologies -- it was my offline suggestion
to Priyank to call one when he felt he was ready to proceed. There had been
a general discussion on the list on the matter about a month ago that was
generally supportive of the idea, but was preliminary and didn't seem broad
enough for a big change to the development pipeline. I didn't want the
discussion to take place on a JIRA or PR that many might miss.
I suggested a vote as a forcing function to have a broader discussion that
might not happen otherwise -- which is what happened.
If there was a better approach more in keeping with the Apache Way, please
let me know either here (maybe in a different thread) or offline. :-)
Geoffrey
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:50 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Point of order Apache communities generally do not vote to achieve
> consensus. That should be a last resort. Please do not vote to make these
> kinds of decisions.
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM Priyank Porwal <pr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > [Converting this thread to a community vote]
> >
> > I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
> > success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
> > https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
> >
> > Things to note:
> > 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits
> are
> > pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
> > 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
> > produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
> > reports linked from the PR as well.
> > 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging
> the
> > PR.
> > 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
> > for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
> > 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several
> jobs,
> > but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
> > 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration
> (one-time)
> > and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
> > Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
> >
> > Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Priyank
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
> > <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis
> CI
> > > will automatically runs all the tests
> > > and post the results to the PR.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
> > > would
> > > > be good.
> > > >
> > > > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our
> code
> > > > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
> > > > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
> > > >
> > > > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
> > > > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
> > > >
> > > > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation
> gotchas
> > > I'd
> > > > be a +1.
> > > >
> > > > Geoffrey
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
> > > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <
> > willshen@marinsoftware.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
> > > > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT)
> > takes
> > > > > ~2h.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <
> tdsilva@salesforce.com
> > > > > > .invalid>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
> > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > to run tests
> > > > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch
> doesn't
> > > > break
> > > > > > > functionality.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
> > > > > priyankporwal@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
> > > > > > > CodeCoverage
> > > > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and
> integration
> > > > tests
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
> > > checkstyle
> > > > > > checks
> > > > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of
> manual
> > > > patch
> > > > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into
> code
> > > > > health.
> > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Priyank
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
Point of order Apache communities generally do not vote to achieve
consensus. That should be a last resort. Please do not vote to make these
kinds of decisions.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM Priyank Porwal <pr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> [Converting this thread to a community vote]
>
> I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
> success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
> https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
>
> Things to note:
> 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits are
> pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
> 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
> produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
> reports linked from the PR as well.
> 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging the
> PR.
> 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
> for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
> 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several jobs,
> but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
> 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration (one-time)
> and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
> Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
>
> Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
>
> Thanks,
> Priyank
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
> <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis CI
> > will automatically runs all the tests
> > and post the results to the PR.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
> > would
> > > be good.
> > >
> > > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our code
> > > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
> > > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
> > >
> > > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
> > > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
> > >
> > > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation gotchas
> > I'd
> > > be a +1.
> > >
> > > Geoffrey
> > >
> > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
> > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <
> willshen@marinsoftware.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
> > > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT)
> takes
> > > > ~2h.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <tdsilva@salesforce.com
> > > > > .invalid>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
> > > > > contributors
> > > > > > to run tests
> > > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch doesn't
> > > break
> > > > > > functionality.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
> > > > priyankporwal@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
> > > > > > CodeCoverage
> > > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and integration
> > > tests
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
> > checkstyle
> > > > > checks
> > > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of manual
> > > patch
> > > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into code
> > > > health.
> > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Priyank
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
Gotta amend this: I am -1 without the ability to successfully run all of
the tests (including integration tests). Some of the chatter on made me
think that ITs were actually running on Travis (which _really_ surprised
me).
On 6/21/19 1:35 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> I am -0.
>
> I don't see value in trying to integrate with an external CI system when
> we already have the ASF Jenkins that gives us more insight than just
> about any other system will give us.
>
> Integrating PreCommit jobs with Github is a question to ASF Infra and
> copying the PreCommit job and checking a button. ZooKeeper and HBase
> have recently done this.
>
> I don't see a good reason provided to use Travis and CodeCov. Let's
> spend some time making what we already have better... HBase is pretty
> successful with their use of Yetus today.
>
> On 6/21/19 3:15 AM, Priyank Porwal wrote:
>> [Converting this thread to a community vote]
>>
>> I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
>> success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
>> https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
>>
>> Things to note:
>> 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits
>> are
>> pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
>> 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
>> produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
>> reports linked from the PR as well.
>> 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI
>> flagging the
>> PR.
>> 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
>> for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
>> 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several
>> jobs,
>> but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
>> 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration
>> (one-time)
>> and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
>> Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
>>
>> Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Priyank
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
>> <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis CI
>>> will automatically runs all the tests
>>> and post the results to the PR.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
>>> would
>>>> be good.
>>>>
>>>> Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our code
>>>> reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
>>>> TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
>>>>
>>>> An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
>>>> page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation gotchas
>>> I'd
>>>> be a +1.
>>>>
>>>> Geoffrey
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
>>>> [2] https://travis-ci.org/
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen
>>>> <willshen@marinsoftware.com
>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
>>>>> Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT) takes
>>>>> ~2h.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <tdsilva@salesforce.com
>>>>>> .invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
>>>>>> contributors
>>>>>>> to run tests
>>>>>>> and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch doesn't
>>>> break
>>>>>>> functionality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
>>>>> priyankporwal@gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
>>>>>>> CodeCoverage
>>>>>>>> for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and integration
>>>> tests
>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
>>> checkstyle
>>>>>> checks
>>>>>>>> (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of manual
>>>> patch
>>>>>>>> uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into code
>>>>> health.
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Priyank
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@gmail.com>.
I'm -0 (as the Apache voting page defines it -- "I won't get in the way,
but I'd rather we didn't do this") because of the stated limitation to unit
tests only. The bulk of our testing is currently through IT tests, so as a
committer I wouldn't have sufficient confidence to commit a patch based
solely on the knowledge that code built and unit tests were passing. It
also seems confusing for contributors to have a test run which is
misleading when green.
I'd be +1 to a solution that incorporated our full test runs including IT
tests into GitHub PRs. If there are multiple paths to get there, then all
things being equal I'd prefer to use Apache infrastructure.
Geoffrey
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:35 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> I am -0.
>
> I don't see value in trying to integrate with an external CI system when
> we already have the ASF Jenkins that gives us more insight than just
> about any other system will give us.
>
> Integrating PreCommit jobs with Github is a question to ASF Infra and
> copying the PreCommit job and checking a button. ZooKeeper and HBase
> have recently done this.
>
> I don't see a good reason provided to use Travis and CodeCov. Let's
> spend some time making what we already have better... HBase is pretty
> successful with their use of Yetus today.
>
> On 6/21/19 3:15 AM, Priyank Porwal wrote:
> > [Converting this thread to a community vote]
> >
> > I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
> > success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
> > https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
> >
> > Things to note:
> > 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits
> are
> > pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
> > 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
> > produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
> > reports linked from the PR as well.
> > 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging
> the
> > PR.
> > 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
> > for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
> > 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several
> jobs,
> > but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
> > 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration
> (one-time)
> > and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
> > Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
> >
> > Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Priyank
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
> > <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis CI
> >> will automatically runs all the tests
> >> and post the results to the PR.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
> >> would
> >>> be good.
> >>>
> >>> Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our code
> >>> reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
> >>> TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
> >>>
> >>> An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
> >>> page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
> >>>
> >>> Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation gotchas
> >> I'd
> >>> be a +1.
> >>>
> >>> Geoffrey
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
> >>> [2] https://travis-ci.org/
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <
> willshen@marinsoftware.com
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
> >>>> Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT) takes
> >>>> ~2h.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <tdsilva@salesforce.com
> >>>>> .invalid>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
> >>>>> contributors
> >>>>>> to run tests
> >>>>>> and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch doesn't
> >>> break
> >>>>>> functionality.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
> >>>> priyankporwal@gmail.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
> >>>>>> CodeCoverage
> >>>>>>> for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and integration
> >>> tests
> >>>>> on
> >>>>>>> each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
> >> checkstyle
> >>>>> checks
> >>>>>>> (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of manual
> >>> patch
> >>>>>>> uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into code
> >>>> health.
> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Priyank
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
I am -0.
I don't see value in trying to integrate with an external CI system when
we already have the ASF Jenkins that gives us more insight than just
about any other system will give us.
Integrating PreCommit jobs with Github is a question to ASF Infra and
copying the PreCommit job and checking a button. ZooKeeper and HBase
have recently done this.
I don't see a good reason provided to use Travis and CodeCov. Let's
spend some time making what we already have better... HBase is pretty
successful with their use of Yetus today.
On 6/21/19 3:15 AM, Priyank Porwal wrote:
> [Converting this thread to a community vote]
>
> I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
> success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
> https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
>
> Things to note:
> 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits are
> pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
> 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
> produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
> reports linked from the PR as well.
> 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging the
> PR.
> 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
> for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
> 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several jobs,
> but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
> 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration (one-time)
> and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
> Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
>
> Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
>
> Thanks,
> Priyank
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
> <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis CI
>> will automatically runs all the tests
>> and post the results to the PR.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
>> would
>>> be good.
>>>
>>> Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our code
>>> reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
>>> TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
>>>
>>> An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
>>> page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
>>>
>>> Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation gotchas
>> I'd
>>> be a +1.
>>>
>>> Geoffrey
>>>
>>> [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
>>> [2] https://travis-ci.org/
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <willshen@marinsoftware.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
>>>> Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT) takes
>>>> ~2h.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <tdsilva@salesforce.com
>>>>> .invalid>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
>>>>> contributors
>>>>>> to run tests
>>>>>> and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch doesn't
>>> break
>>>>>> functionality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
>>>> priyankporwal@gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
>>>>>> CodeCoverage
>>>>>>> for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and integration
>>> tests
>>>>> on
>>>>>>> each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
>> checkstyle
>>>>> checks
>>>>>>> (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of manual
>>> patch
>>>>>>> uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into code
>>>> health.
>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Priyank
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Priyank Porwal <pr...@gmail.com>.
The IT do successfully start in Travis just fine, but Travis has a time
limit of 50 minutes for open-source projects, and Phoenix ITs run for
almost 3 hours. This limit is applied per 'job' and not to the complete
cycle. I did attempt to break down Phoenix ITs into multiple jobs, but
couldn't complete that due to lack of experience with Maven and other
plugins. Hence, I proposed to initiate the on-boarding process which would
be no-op for existing Phoneix contributors. It is not yet ready to be a
replace ASK infra, at least not yet.
Ignoring TravisCI and CodeCov specifically (I have no affinity or
anti-affinity to either), the aim was to get a similar experience - devs
publishing new PRs and/or pushing new commits to existing PRs should
trigger automated build and test-runs; and show code-coverage reports in
addition to test reports. Currently, devs are required to squash all their
commits into a single one and upload patches to trigger test runs. Also,
there is no visibility into coverage info from our test runs. If Yetus or
anything else in ASF infra can support that, I can attempt onboarding to
them.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:49 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Travis is underpowered compared to ASF test infrastructure. Do the
> integration tests run there?
>
> Recommend using ASF infra and Yetus (yetus.apache.org). HBase provides a
> completely worked example of how to integrate and use it for precommit.
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM Priyank Porwal <pr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > [Converting this thread to a community vote]
> >
> > I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
> > success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
> > https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
> >
> > Things to note:
> > 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits
> are
> > pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
> > 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
> > produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
> > reports linked from the PR as well.
> > 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging
> the
> > PR.
> > 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
> > for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
> > 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several
> jobs,
> > but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
> > 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration
> (one-time)
> > and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
> > Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
> >
> > Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Priyank
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
> > <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis
> CI
> > > will automatically runs all the tests
> > > and post the results to the PR.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
> > > would
> > > > be good.
> > > >
> > > > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our
> code
> > > > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
> > > > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
> > > >
> > > > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
> > > > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
> > > >
> > > > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation
> gotchas
> > > I'd
> > > > be a +1.
> > > >
> > > > Geoffrey
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
> > > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <
> > willshen@marinsoftware.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
> > > > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT)
> > takes
> > > > > ~2h.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <
> tdsilva@salesforce.com
> > > > > > .invalid>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
> > > > > > contributors
> > > > > > > to run tests
> > > > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch
> doesn't
> > > > break
> > > > > > > functionality.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
> > > > > priyankporwal@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
> > > > > > > CodeCoverage
> > > > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and
> integration
> > > > tests
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
> > > checkstyle
> > > > > > checks
> > > > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of
> manual
> > > > patch
> > > > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into
> code
> > > > > health.
> > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Priyank
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: [VOTE] PHOENIX-4863: Setup Travis-CI & CodeCoverage
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
Travis is underpowered compared to ASF test infrastructure. Do the
integration tests run there?
Recommend using ASF infra and Yetus (yetus.apache.org). HBase provides a
completely worked example of how to integrate and use it for precommit.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:15 AM Priyank Porwal <pr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> [Converting this thread to a community vote]
>
> I'd like to start Travis-CI and CodeCov integration after getting some
> success with both on a fork in my personal account. Checkout -
> https://github.com/priyankporwal/phoenix/pull/3
>
> Things to note:
> 1. TravisCI kicked-off as soon as the PR is created and/or new commits are
> pushed. No additional developer action is necessary.
> 2. Once completed, code-coverage report is uploaded to CodeCov which
> produced a nice color-coded graph of different folders/files. Detailed
> reports linked from the PR as well.
> 3. Confirmed that compilation and test failures resulted in CI flagging the
> PR.
> 4. Currently, TravisCI only runs unit-tests. "mvn verify" takes too long
> for it to be included in Travis' scipt stage (max allowed time per job is
> 50 mins) - I made several attempts to break up the tests into several jobs,
> but lack of maven skills prevented me from achieving that goal.
> 5. Repo-admin permissions only needed to start this integration (one-time)
> and thereafter, incremental improvements can be made via any regular PR.
> Perhaps folks with maven expertise can get to it sooner.
>
> Please vote on proceeding with the integration with TravisCI and CodeCov.
>
> Thanks,
> Priyank
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:54 PM Thomas D'Silva
> <td...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > I assume we want to run all the ITs. Whevenver a PR is created Travis CI
> > will automatically runs all the tests
> > and post the results to the PR.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know much about this particular tool, but something like this
> > would
> > > be good.
> > >
> > > Our current toolchain, with HadoopQA needing a JIRA patch and our code
> > > reviews mostly migrating to Github is really awkward to deal with, so
> > > TravisCI's Github integration's a definite plus.
> > >
> > > An example of Tephra's integration is here[1]: and on TravisCI's home
> > > page[2] they mention that open source projects are free.
> > >
> > > Assuming there are no licensing, scalability or implementation gotchas
> > I'd
> > > be a +1.
> > >
> > > Geoffrey
> > >
> > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-tephra
> > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:31 PM William Shen <
> willshen@marinsoftware.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 It would be awesome to be able to do this.
> > > > Any concerns if we choose to run long IT as part of this setup?
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:00 PM Pedro Boado <pb...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What IT would you suggest to run? Testsuite (including long IT)
> takes
> > > > ~2h.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019, 20:40 Thomas D'Silva, <tdsilva@salesforce.com
> > > > > .invalid>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 I think its a great idea. This would make it easier for new
> > > > > contributors
> > > > > > to run tests
> > > > > > and also make it easier for committers to verify a patch doesn't
> > > break
> > > > > > functionality.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM Priyank Porwal <
> > > > priyankporwal@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What do you guys think about this work to setup Travis-CI and
> > > > > > CodeCoverage
> > > > > > > for Phoenix? The objective would be to run unit and integration
> > > tests
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > each PR, show code-coverage reports and perhaps also do
> > checkstyle
> > > > > checks
> > > > > > > (after initial scrubbing effort). This would help rid of manual
> > > patch
> > > > > > > uploads that we need currently, plus bring visibility into code
> > > > health.
> > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4863
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Priyank
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk