spark-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Joyce <mltjo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Licensing check] Spark 0.8.0-incubating RC1
Date Wed, 04 Sep 2013 03:21:51 GMT
Agreed. It would be nice for people to be able to contribute in a way that
doesn't force them through Github. I can't see that as being painful but it
would probably be nice for others to have the option at the very least. I
think the vast majority of people when given the two options will pick
Github so we wouldn't really lose out on much. Plus it would be a bummer to
miss out on contributions because someone is uncomfortable with Github or
pull request in general.

----------------
Mike


On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hey Reynold,
>
> It  is just another way to contribute patches and can be used as transition
> flow for people than come from SVN or other centralized source control
> software.
>
> - Henry
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Reynold Xin <reynoldx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That seems substantially more overhead than generating github pull
> > requests. Is there any particular reason we want to do that?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Guys.
> > >
> > > In other ASF projects I also allow people to attach the git diff to the
> > > JIRA itself (once we have one) and apply the patch and merge manually.
> > > I believe we could later configure ASF Jenkins to run when a patch is
> > > attached to JIRA (like in HBase and Hadoop).
> > >
> > > Do we want to also describe/ allow this alternative way to contribute
> > > patches?
> > >
> > >
> > > - Henry
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Matei Zaharia <matei.zaharia@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > As far as I understood, we will have to manually merge those PRs into
> > the
> > > > Apache repo. However, GitHub will notice that they're "merged" as
> soon
> > as
> > > > it sees those commits in the repo, and will automatically close them.
> > At
> > > > least this is my experience merging other peoples' code (sometimes I
> > just
> > > > check out their branch from their repo and merge it manually).
> > > >
> > > > Matei
> > > >
> > > > On Sep 3, 2013, at 6:52 PM, Michael Joyce <joyce@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Henry,
> > > > >
> > > > > I fairly certain that we'll have to manually resolve the pull
> > requests.
> > > > As
> > > > > far as I know, the Github mirror is simply a read-only mirror of
> the
> > > > > project's repository (be it svn or git). Hopefully someone will
> chime
> > > in
> > > > > and correct me if I'm wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Joyce
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Henry Saputra <
> > henry.saputra@gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> So looks like we need to manually resolve the Github pull
> requests.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Or, does github automatically know that a particular merge to
ASF
> > git
> > > > repo
> > > > >> is associated to a GitHub pull request?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> - Henry
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Matei Zaharia <
> > > matei.zaharia@gmail.com
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Yup, the plan is as follows:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> - Make pull request against the mirror
> > > > >>> - Code review on GitHub as usual
> > > > >>> - Whoever merges it will simply merge it into the main Apache
> repo;
> > > > when
> > > > >>> this propagates, the PR will be marked as merged
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I found at least one other Apache project that did this:
> > > > >>> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/ContributorWorkflow.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Matei
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Sep 3, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Mark Hamstra <
> mark@clearstorydata.com
> > >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> What is going to be the process for making pull requests?
 Can
> > they
> > > be
> > > > >>> made
> > > > >>>> against the github mirror (
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark
> > > > ),
> > > > >>> or
> > > > >>>> must we use some other way?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Matei Zaharia <
> > > > >> matei.zaharia@gmail.com
> > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> Hi guys,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> So are you planning to release 0.8 from the master
branch
> (which
> > > is
> > > > >> at
> > > > >>>>>> a106ed8... now) or from branch-0.8?
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Right now the branches are the same in terms of content
> (though I
> > > > >> might
> > > > >>>>> not have merged the latest changes into 0.8). If
we add stuff
> > into
> > > > >>> master
> > > > >>>>> that we won't want in 0.8 we'll break that.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> My recommendation is that we start to use the
Incubator
> release
> > > > >>>>> doc/guide:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Cool, thanks for the pointer. I'll try to follow
the steps
> there
> > > > about
> > > > >>>>> signing.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Are we "locking" pull requests to github repo
by tomorrow?
> > > > >>>>>> Meaning no more push to GitHub repo for Spark.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> From your email seems like there will be more
potential pull
> > > > requests
> > > > >>> for
> > > > >>>>>> github repo to be merged back to ASF Git repo.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> We'll probably use the GitHub repo for the last few
changes in
> > this
> > > > >>>>> release and then switch. The reason is that there's
a bit of
> work
> > > to
> > > > >> do
> > > > >>>>> pull requests against the Apache one.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Matei
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message