-1 for allowing overrides. If there's an edge case on which it's required, then we could use it at the very last resources *if and only if* it's been discussed and approved through the dev list for that particular case. Cheers.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:35 PM Robert Houghton <rhough...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Any committer has the 'status' permission on apache/geode.git. Some API > tokens have it as well. Its curl + github API reasoning to do this. > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 2:02 PM Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > If we are going to allow overrides, then maybe what Owen is describing > > should occur. Make a request on the dev list and explain the reasoning. > > > > I don't think this has been done and a few have already been overridden. > > > > Also who has the capability to override and knows how. How is that > > determined? > > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 1:59 PM Owen Nichols <onich...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > > > > How do you override a check, anyway? > > > > > > Much like asking for jira permissions, wiki permissions, etc, just ask > on > > > the dev list ;) > > > > > > Presumably this type of request would be made as a “last resort” > > following > > > a dev list discussion wherein all other reasonable options had been > > > exhausted (reworking or splitting up the PR, pushing empty commits, > > > rebasing the PR, etc) > > > > > > > On Oct 30, 2019, at 1:42 PM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > > > > > +1 for allowing overrides. I think we should avoid backing ourselves > > > into a > > > > corner where we can't get anything into develop without talking to > > apache > > > > infra. Some infrastructure things we can't even fix without pushing a > > > > change develop! > > > > > > > > How do you override a check, anyway? > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 12:58 PM Donal Evans <doev...@pivotal.io> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> -1 to overriding from me. > > > >> > > > >> The question I have here is what's the rush? Is anything ever so > > > >> time-sensitive that you can't even wait the 15 minutes it takes for > it > > > to > > > >> build and run unit tests? If some infrastructure problem is > preventing > > > >> builds or tests from completing then that should be fixed before any > > new > > > >> changes are added, otherwise what's the point in even having the pre > > > >> check-in process? > > > >> > > > >> -Donal > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:44 AM Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> @Aaron > > > >>> It's okay to wait for at least the build, and unit tests to > complete, > > > to > > > >>> cover all the bases. [There may have been commits in between which > > may > > > >>> result in failure because of the revert] And it's not hard to get > a > > PR > > > >>> approval. > > > >>> > > > >>> -1 on overriding. If the infrastructure is down, which is the test > > > >>> framework designed to ensure that we are not checking in unwanted > > > changes > > > >>> into Apache Geode, wait for the infrastructure to be up, get your > > > changes > > > >>> verified, get the review from a fellow committer and then check-in > > your > > > >>> changes. > > > >>> > > > >>> I still don't understand why will anyone not wait for unit tests > and > > > >> build > > > >>> to be successful. > > > >>> > > > >>> Regards > > > >>> Nabarun Nag > > > >>> > > > >>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:32 AM Aaron Lindsey < > alind...@pivotal.io> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> One case when it might be acceptable to overrule a PR check is > > > >> reverting > > > >>> a > > > >>>> commit. Before the branch protection was enabled, a committer > could > > > >>> revert > > > >>>> a commit without a PR. Now that PRs are mandatory, we have to wait > > for > > > >>> the > > > >>>> checks to run in order to revert a commit. Usually we are > reverting > > a > > > >>>> commit because it's causing problems, so I think overruling the PR > > > >> checks > > > >>>> may be acceptable in that case. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - Aaron > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:11 AM Owen Nichols < > onich...@pivotal.io> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Our new branch-protection rules can sometimes lead to unexpected > > > >>>> obstacles > > > >>>>> when infrastructure issues impede the intended process. Should > we > > > >>>> discuss > > > >>>>> such cases as they come up, and should overruling the result of a > > PR > > > >>>> check > > > >>>>> ever be an option on the table? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> -Owen > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- Ju@N
