You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@drill.apache.org by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> on 2013/07/15 22:28:48 UTC
Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development branch
and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears that
everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
master and all tests pass.
Jacques
Re: Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
Posted by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>.
Arg... It is a case problem. The s in Workspace should be lower case.
That is what I get for changing it after previously committing it and git
configuration defaulting to ignore case.
I will try to fix soon. In the meantime, you can change manually.
Thanks
Jacques
On Jul 19, 2013 8:42 PM, "Tanujit Ghosh" <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I downloaded the source after the latest merge into master and tried
> compiling and getting the following error during mvn build
>
> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin:3.0:compile
> (default-compile) on project java-exec: Compilation failure: Compilation
> failure:
> [ERROR]
>
> /backup/java/incubator-drill/sandbox/prototype/exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/expr/annotations/WorkSpace.java:[13,9]
> class Workspace is public, should be declared in a file named
> Workspace.java
> [ERROR]
>
> /backup/java/incubator-drill/sandbox/prototype/exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/expr/annotations/Workspace.java:[13,9]
> duplicate class: org.apache.drill.exec.expr.annotations.Workspace
> [ERROR] -> [Help 1]
>
>
> Regards
> Tanujit
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Based on this feedback, I've now merged execwork and master so are the
> > same. I also tagged the pre-merge changeset for later reference.
> > Please rebase your changes against master and continue your future
> > development and patch work there.
> >
> > For those that haven't tried it out yet, check out FishEye, nice
> > ability to review the source tree.
> > https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/changelog/incubator-drill
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jacques
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Michael Hausenblas
> > <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > +1 from my side as well, but we really need to document this clearly
> and
> > nicely on the Wiki, in big red <blink> letters ;)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michael Hausenblas
> > > Ireland, Europe
> > > http://mhausenblas.info/
> > >
> > > On 16 Jul 2013, at 09:17, Srihari Srinivasan <
> ssriniva@thoughtworks.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1...this will be very useful for fresh starters!
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development
> branch
> > >>> and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
> > >>> test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears
> that
> > >>> everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
> > >>> had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
> > >>> project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
> > >>> is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
> > >>> execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
> > >>> With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
> > >>> of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
> > >>> master and all tests pass.
> > >>>
> > >>> Jacques
> > >>>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Tanujit
>
Re: Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
Posted by Tanujit Ghosh <ta...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I downloaded the source after the latest merge into master and tried
compiling and getting the following error during mvn build
[ERROR] Failed to execute goal
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin:3.0:compile
(default-compile) on project java-exec: Compilation failure: Compilation
failure:
[ERROR]
/backup/java/incubator-drill/sandbox/prototype/exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/expr/annotations/WorkSpace.java:[13,9]
class Workspace is public, should be declared in a file named Workspace.java
[ERROR]
/backup/java/incubator-drill/sandbox/prototype/exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/expr/annotations/Workspace.java:[13,9]
duplicate class: org.apache.drill.exec.expr.annotations.Workspace
[ERROR] -> [Help 1]
Regards
Tanujit
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Based on this feedback, I've now merged execwork and master so are the
> same. I also tagged the pre-merge changeset for later reference.
> Please rebase your changes against master and continue your future
> development and patch work there.
>
> For those that haven't tried it out yet, check out FishEye, nice
> ability to review the source tree.
> https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/changelog/incubator-drill
>
> Thanks,
> Jacques
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Michael Hausenblas
> <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +1 from my side as well, but we really need to document this clearly and
> nicely on the Wiki, in big red <blink> letters ;)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Michael
> >
> > --
> > Michael Hausenblas
> > Ireland, Europe
> > http://mhausenblas.info/
> >
> > On 16 Jul 2013, at 09:17, Srihari Srinivasan <ss...@thoughtworks.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1...this will be very useful for fresh starters!
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development branch
> >>> and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
> >>> test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears that
> >>> everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
> >>> had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
> >>> project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
> >>> is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
> >>> execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
> >>> With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
> >>> of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
> >>> master and all tests pass.
> >>>
> >>> Jacques
> >>>
> >
>
--
Regards,
Tanujit
Re: Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
Posted by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>.
Based on this feedback, I've now merged execwork and master so are the
same. I also tagged the pre-merge changeset for later reference.
Please rebase your changes against master and continue your future
development and patch work there.
For those that haven't tried it out yet, check out FishEye, nice
ability to review the source tree.
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/changelog/incubator-drill
Thanks,
Jacques
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Michael Hausenblas
<mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 from my side as well, but we really need to document this clearly and nicely on the Wiki, in big red <blink> letters ;)
>
> Cheers,
> Michael
>
> --
> Michael Hausenblas
> Ireland, Europe
> http://mhausenblas.info/
>
> On 16 Jul 2013, at 09:17, Srihari Srinivasan <ss...@thoughtworks.com> wrote:
>
>> +1...this will be very useful for fresh starters!
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development branch
>>> and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
>>> test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears that
>>> everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
>>> had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
>>> project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
>>> is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
>>> execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
>>> With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
>>> of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
>>> master and all tests pass.
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>
Re: Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
Posted by Michael Hausenblas <mi...@gmail.com>.
+1 from my side as well, but we really need to document this clearly and nicely on the Wiki, in big red <blink> letters ;)
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Hausenblas
Ireland, Europe
http://mhausenblas.info/
On 16 Jul 2013, at 09:17, Srihari Srinivasan <ss...@thoughtworks.com> wrote:
> +1...this will be very useful for fresh starters!
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development branch
>> and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
>> test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears that
>> everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
>> had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
>> project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
>> is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
>> execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
>> With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
>> of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
>> master and all tests pass.
>>
>> Jacques
>>
Re: Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
Posted by Srihari Srinivasan <ss...@thoughtworks.com>.
+1...this will be very useful for fresh starters!
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development branch
> and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
> test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears that
> everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
> had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
> project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
> is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
> execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
> With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
> of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
> master and all tests pass.
>
> Jacques
>
Re: Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
Posted by Timothy Chen <tn...@gmail.com>.
execwork to me was already master :)
+1!
Tim
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> With git, working on a private copy of trunk is equivalent of the old style
> working on a branch.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development branch
> > and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
> > test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears that
> > everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
> > had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
> > project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
> > is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
> > execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
> > With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
> > of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
> > master and all tests pass.
> >
> > Jacques
> >
>
Re: Proposal: consolidate execwork and master
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
+1
With git, working on a private copy of trunk is equivalent of the old style
working on a branch.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> The vision of the execwork branch was to maintain a development branch
> and then merge to master once we were happy with the quality and unit
> test completeness of the execwork stuff. However, it now appears that
> everyone is working in the execwork branch. Additionally, I've also
> had a number of offhand comments from those less familiar with the
> project who assume that a lack of commits on master means the project
> is less active than it is. As such, I propose that we merge the
> execwork branch back into master and continue to do our work there.
> With the lastest push of Ben's patches for ValueVectors and the merge
> of DRILL-140 into execwork, execwork includes all the changes in
> master and all tests pass.
>
> Jacques
>