Build Update for apache/geode-native
-
Build: #2818
Status: Fixed
Duration: 1 hr, 18 mins, and 26 secs
Commit: 3478d98 (support/1.12)
Author: Owen Nichols
Message: parameterize GEODE_VERSION so that Geode release scripts can maintain
this going forward
View t
Build Update for apache/geode-native
-
Build: #2817
Status: Broken
Duration: 1 min and 40 secs
Commit: 6e372e5 (support/1.13)
Author: Owen Nichols
Message: parameterize GEODE_VERSION so that Geode release scripts can maintain
this going forward
View the chang
I think there are many good reasons to flip the default value for this
property. I do question whether requiring a user to allocate new hardware to
support the changed resource requirements is appropriate for a minor version
bump. In most cases I think that would come as an unwelcome surprise du
+1
I think we as a project will need to iterator on the code owners as well as the
process for code owners. But this is a model that has been adopted by a number
of OSS projects both within and outside of Apache. I like that it provides
visibility to PR authors and associates motivated expert
Agreed…although snapshots will never be on Apache release mirrors. We do have
alternate locations for builds that go through the CI pipelines we could use.
Anthony
On Nov 19, 2020, at 7:55 AM, Jacob Barrett
mailto:jabarr...@vmware.com>> wrote:
Ideally the develop branches of these other repo
I will ll automate the maintenance of then hardcoded version references.
Thanks for pointing these out, they were not on my radar…
From: Jacob Barrett
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 7:56 AM
To: dev@geode.apache.org
Subject: Re: apache-geode-1.13.0.tgz not found in LGTM analysis
One of my
Perfect, then let's give this a try.
+1
On 11/19/20, 10:45 AM, "Robert Houghton" wrote:
Hi Ernie,
DRAFT PRs do not get reviewers by default, but when the draft transitions
to ‘ready’, then the owners are requested to review.
From: Ernie Burghardt
Date: Thursday, November 19
Hi Ernie,
DRAFT PRs do not get reviewers by default, but when the draft transitions to
‘ready’, then the owners are requested to review.
From: Ernie Burghardt
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 9:56 AM
To: dev@geode.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
Does Gi
Personally, this has caused enough grief in the past (both ways, actually!)
that I 'd say this is a major version change.
I agree with John. Either value of conserve-sockets can crash or hang your
system depending on your use case.
If this was just a matter of slowing down or speeding up perform
@onichols, to answer your questions:
* If there is only one owner, and the owner is on vacation, then a PR will
be delayed
* If you are an owner, and the only other owner is on vacation, then the PR
will be delayed
* If one is the sole owner, then the owner-review requirement is not
Does GitHub allow us to limit this automated action to non-DRAFT PRs?
On 11/18/20, 8:28 PM, "Owen Nichols" wrote:
+1 This will greatly improve the experience for contributors. Instead of
an intimidating empty list of reviewers when you submit a PR (and no ability to
add reviewers, if y
Just to clarify a comment from Owen, conserve-sockets=true does show improved
performance over conserve-sockets=false in certain specific scenarios, but this
isn't a hard and fast rule that applies everywhere, even excluding the cases
where using conserve-sockets=true can lead to distributed dea
I would argue that is doesn’t change the outward behavior of the product. It
does change the internal workings of the product. It does improve the
performance and reliability. As long as changes to the internals don’t have
effect on the outward facing behavior of the product I see no problem mak
One of my biggest beefs is that we have to hard code the current version all
over the place. It's in the docker image used by native to run Travis jobs.
It’s also in the benchmark job Gradle and shell scripts. Feels like there has
got to be a better way.
Ideally the develop branches of these ot
Thanks for the info, Owen.
I have created a JIRA and a PR to update the .lgtm.yml file in the geode-native
repo: https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/698
Any volunteer to review it?
BR,
Alberto
From: Owen Nichols
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 11:50
It looks like it was hardcoded[1] that way recently. Geode 1.13.1 was just
announced[2] so you are correct, 1.13.0 is archived and no longer on the
mirrors.
If maintaining a hardcoded Geode version number in geode-native is necessary,
the set_versions[3] script should be updated to keep it in
Hi,
I am getting the following error in the LGTM analysis of some pull requests
since yesterday (for example https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/690):
[2020-11-19 07:25:41] [build-err] + wget -O apache-geode.tgz
http://mirror.transip.net/apache/geode/1.13.0/apache-geode-1.13.0.tgz
[2020
I'm all in for changing the default to *false* but, unfortunately and for
all the reasons already stated in the thread, I'm hesitant to include this
change as part of a minor release.
Best regards.
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 at 02:48, John Blum wrote:
> The downside of conserve-sockets = false is that
18 matches
Mail list logo
