You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pulsar.apache.org by PengHui Li <pe...@apache.org> on 2020/01/07 10:39:02 UTC
Re: Talk about how to improve release process
Thanks @xiaolong for starting a thread to discuss the release process.
Uses a script to cherry-pick PRs to planned branch automatically is
more convenient.
I also have some questions since I'm not very familiar with the release
process of bookkeeper
1. When check-pick a PR to non-master branch, are the tests will be trigger?
2. Is the script need rebase the current PR base on master branch?
3. Is it in the merge process to decide which branches to act on?
And, can we trigger tests based on a tag since it's useful for minor
version release.
-Penghui Li
Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> 于2019年12月23日周一 下午1:59写道：
> One of the challenges I have seen in the release process is how to merge a
> pull request to multiple branches for multiple releases. Especially the
> community has grown very fast, I can see multiple concurrent release
> efforts. Hence I would strongly recommend adopting the merge flow from
> BookKeeper and adjust it to fit into the Pulsar development cycle. This can
> address many pain points we have seen in the release process.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 1:18 PM Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks @xiaolong for rising up this discussion.
> > Apache BookKeeper uses a script to do the PR merge, and the script could
> > handle cherry-pick into old branch if needed. This could avoid
> cherry-pick
> > at the release time.
> >
> >
> > Best Regards.
> >
> >
> > Jia Zhai
> >
> > Beijing, China
> >
> > Mobile: +86 15810491983
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 3:57 PM xiaolong ran <ra...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In PIP-47, we have adopted the Time Based Release Plan,
> > > If we can improve our release process, we will run it better.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks
> > > Xiaolong Ran
> > >
> > >
> > > > 在 2019年12月10日，下午3:54，xiaolong ran <ra...@gmail.com> 写道：
> > > >
> > > > Hello all committers:
> > > >
> > > > During release 2.4.2, there are some questions I want to
> > > > share with you, see how to further improve our release
> > > > process.
> > > >
> > > > One: Currently for the minor version of the bug fix, e.g: v2.4.2.
> > > > We are based on the `branch-2.4`, execute `cherry-pick` to
> > > > merge the pull requests into branch-2.4. This process is very
> > > > painful, details as follows:
> > > >
> > > > - Since the 2.4.2 version is only a bug fix to the 2.4.0 and 2.4.1
> > > versions,
> > > > we cannot cherry-pick the changes related to the protocol, interface,
> > etc
> > > > to the 2.4.2 version. But some pull requests that belong to 2.4.2 are
> > > > based on these changes, In 2.4.2, we can only split these changes
> > > > again and send a new pull request.
> > > >
> > > > In here, do we have a reasonable solution to this problem?
> > > >
> > > > Two: Currently, the test check of branch not work, there are
> > > > two main problems:
> > > >
> > > > - the java8 tests missing
> > > > - the cpp tests not work
> > > >
> > > > Maybe we can start the branch function to ensure that
> > > > each branch is in a working state.
> > > >
> > > > Three: there are some confuse in the release process
> > > > documentation.
> > > >
> > > > About this, I have update the release process documentation.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Xiaolong Ran
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Talk about how to improve release process
Posted by PengHui Li <pe...@apache.org>.
Hi Xiaolong,
Thanks for your patient explanation.
Looking forward to adopting the merge flow from BookKeeper
Thanks
-Penghui
xiaolong ran <ra...@gmail.com> 于2020年1月8日周三 上午10:33写道：
> Hello Penghui Li:
>
> > 1. When check-pick a PR to non-master branch, are the tests will be
> trigger?
>
> Yes, we need to open branch and make sure every branch tests will be
> trigger.
> Currently, the feature can’t work, the issue as follows:
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/5736 <
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/5736>
>
> > 2. Is the script need rebase the current PR base on master branch?
>
> No, all changes are still based on master, but they may need to resolve
> conflicts when committer merge the pull request.
>
> Currently, the owner of each release to resolve all conflicts, If we adopt
> the bookkeeper release method, we can share these weights until
> each time the pull request is merged.
>
>
> > 3. Is it in the merge process to decide which branches to act on?
>
> Yes, I think so, when we merge the pull request, we need to decide which
> master branch(e.g: 2.4.0) this change will be merged into.
>
> --
> Thanks
> Xiaolong Ran
>
>
> > 在 2020年1月7日，下午6:39，PengHui Li <pe...@apache.org> 写道：
> >
> > Thanks @xiaolong for starting a thread to discuss the release process.
> >
> > Uses a script to cherry-pick PRs to planned branch automatically is
> > more convenient.
> > I also have some questions since I'm not very familiar with the release
> > process of bookkeeper
> >
> > 1. When check-pick a PR to non-master branch, are the tests will be
> trigger?
> > 2. Is the script need rebase the current PR base on master branch?
> > 3. Is it in the merge process to decide which branches to act on?
> >
> > And, can we trigger tests based on a tag since it's useful for minor
> > version release.
> >
> > -Penghui Li
> >
> > Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> 于2019年12月23日周一 下午1:59写道：
> >
> >> One of the challenges I have seen in the release process is how to
> merge a
> >> pull request to multiple branches for multiple releases. Especially the
> >> community has grown very fast, I can see multiple concurrent release
> >> efforts. Hence I would strongly recommend adopting the merge flow from
> >> BookKeeper and adjust it to fit into the Pulsar development cycle. This
> can
> >> address many pain points we have seen in the release process.
> >>
> >> - Sijie
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 1:18 PM Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks @xiaolong for rising up this discussion.
> >>> Apache BookKeeper uses a script to do the PR merge, and the script
> could
> >>> handle cherry-pick into old branch if needed. This could avoid
> >> cherry-pick
> >>> at the release time.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Best Regards.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jia Zhai
> >>>
> >>> Beijing, China
> >>>
> >>> Mobile: +86 15810491983
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 3:57 PM xiaolong ran <ranxiaolong716@gmail.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In PIP-47, we have adopted the Time Based Release Plan,
> >>>> If we can improve our release process, we will run it better.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Xiaolong Ran
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> 在 2019年12月10日，下午3:54，xiaolong ran <ra...@gmail.com> 写道：
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello all committers:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> During release 2.4.2, there are some questions I want to
> >>>>> share with you, see how to further improve our release
> >>>>> process.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One: Currently for the minor version of the bug fix, e.g: v2.4.2.
> >>>>> We are based on the `branch-2.4`, execute `cherry-pick` to
> >>>>> merge the pull requests into branch-2.4. This process is very
> >>>>> painful, details as follows:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Since the 2.4.2 version is only a bug fix to the 2.4.0 and 2.4.1
> >>>> versions,
> >>>>> we cannot cherry-pick the changes related to the protocol, interface,
> >>> etc
> >>>>> to the 2.4.2 version. But some pull requests that belong to 2.4.2 are
> >>>>> based on these changes, In 2.4.2, we can only split these changes
> >>>>> again and send a new pull request.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In here, do we have a reasonable solution to this problem?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Two: Currently, the test check of branch not work, there are
> >>>>> two main problems:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - the java8 tests missing
> >>>>> - the cpp tests not work
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Maybe we can start the branch function to ensure that
> >>>>> each branch is in a working state.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Three: there are some confuse in the release process
> >>>>> documentation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> About this, I have update the release process documentation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>> Xiaolong Ran
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Re: Talk about how to improve release process
Posted by xiaolong ran <ra...@gmail.com>.
Hello Penghui Li:
> 1. When check-pick a PR to non-master branch, are the tests will be trigger?
Yes, we need to open branch and make sure every branch tests will be trigger.
Currently, the feature can’t work, the issue as follows:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/5736 <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/5736>
> 2. Is the script need rebase the current PR base on master branch?
No, all changes are still based on master, but they may need to resolve
conflicts when committer merge the pull request.
Currently, the owner of each release to resolve all conflicts, If we adopt
the bookkeeper release method, we can share these weights until
each time the pull request is merged.
> 3. Is it in the merge process to decide which branches to act on?
Yes, I think so, when we merge the pull request, we need to decide which
master branch(e.g: 2.4.0) this change will be merged into.
--
Thanks
Xiaolong Ran
> 在 2020年1月7日，下午6:39，PengHui Li <pe...@apache.org> 写道：
>
> Thanks @xiaolong for starting a thread to discuss the release process.
>
> Uses a script to cherry-pick PRs to planned branch automatically is
> more convenient.
> I also have some questions since I'm not very familiar with the release
> process of bookkeeper
>
> 1. When check-pick a PR to non-master branch, are the tests will be trigger?
> 2. Is the script need rebase the current PR base on master branch?
> 3. Is it in the merge process to decide which branches to act on?
>
> And, can we trigger tests based on a tag since it's useful for minor
> version release.
>
> -Penghui Li
>
> Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> 于2019年12月23日周一 下午1:59写道：
>
>> One of the challenges I have seen in the release process is how to merge a
>> pull request to multiple branches for multiple releases. Especially the
>> community has grown very fast, I can see multiple concurrent release
>> efforts. Hence I would strongly recommend adopting the merge flow from
>> BookKeeper and adjust it to fit into the Pulsar development cycle. This can
>> address many pain points we have seen in the release process.
>>
>> - Sijie
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 1:18 PM Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks @xiaolong for rising up this discussion.
>>> Apache BookKeeper uses a script to do the PR merge, and the script could
>>> handle cherry-pick into old branch if needed. This could avoid
>> cherry-pick
>>> at the release time.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best Regards.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jia Zhai
>>>
>>> Beijing, China
>>>
>>> Mobile: +86 15810491983
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 3:57 PM xiaolong ran <ra...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In PIP-47, we have adopted the Time Based Release Plan,
>>>> If we can improve our release process, we will run it better.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Xiaolong Ran
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 在 2019年12月10日，下午3:54，xiaolong ran <ra...@gmail.com> 写道：
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello all committers:
>>>>>
>>>>> During release 2.4.2, there are some questions I want to
>>>>> share with you, see how to further improve our release
>>>>> process.
>>>>>
>>>>> One: Currently for the minor version of the bug fix, e.g: v2.4.2.
>>>>> We are based on the `branch-2.4`, execute `cherry-pick` to
>>>>> merge the pull requests into branch-2.4. This process is very
>>>>> painful, details as follows:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Since the 2.4.2 version is only a bug fix to the 2.4.0 and 2.4.1
>>>> versions,
>>>>> we cannot cherry-pick the changes related to the protocol, interface,
>>> etc
>>>>> to the 2.4.2 version. But some pull requests that belong to 2.4.2 are
>>>>> based on these changes, In 2.4.2, we can only split these changes
>>>>> again and send a new pull request.
>>>>>
>>>>> In here, do we have a reasonable solution to this problem?
>>>>>
>>>>> Two: Currently, the test check of branch not work, there are
>>>>> two main problems:
>>>>>
>>>>> - the java8 tests missing
>>>>> - the cpp tests not work
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe we can start the branch function to ensure that
>>>>> each branch is in a working state.
>>>>>
>>>>> Three: there are some confuse in the release process
>>>>> documentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> About this, I have update the release process documentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Xiaolong Ran
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>