git.net

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Testing 4.0 Post-Freeze


Having an explicit way to tell the community that we all will work on
testing is better than writing a patch which will sit without review for
months. I think not having your patch reviewed for months is more
discouraging than following the community and helping with stability of
4.0.



On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 3:02 PM Josh McKenzie <jmckenzie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >
> > We propose that between the September freeze date and beta, a new branch
> > would not be created and trunk would only have bug fixes and performance
> > improvements committed to it.
>
>
> This is more of a call to action and announcement of intent than an attempt
> > to
> > enforce policy; we can and probably will branch off 4.0, and keep trunk
> > technically active.
>
> These are two very different statements. :) Which is it?
>
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 5:57 PM Aleksey Yeshchenko <aleksey@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > If we want to have a stable, usable 4.0.0 release out in the next 6-12
> > months, there needs to be a focused effort on getting it out - or else
> > it’ll just never happen.
> >
> > This is more of a call to action and announcement of intent than an
> > attempt to enforce policy; we can and probably will branch off 4.0, and
> > keep trunk technically active. But so long as there is a critical mass of
> > active contributors who are on board with only/mostly working on
> stability,
> > bug fixes, and validation - both as assignees and reviewers - we’ll have
> a
> > de-facto freeze.
> >
> > And I have a feeling that there is such a critical mass.
> >
> > —
> > AY
> >
> > On 3 July 2018 at 22:23:38, Jeff Jirsa (jjirsa@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >
> > I think there's value in the psychological commitment that if someone has
> > time to contribute, their contributions should be focused on validating a
> > release, not pushing future features.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:03 PM, Jonathan Haddad <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with Josh. I don’t see how changing the convention around trunk
> > > will improve the process, seems like it’ll only introduce a handful of
> > > rollback commits when people forget.
> > >
> > > Other than that, it all makes sense to me.
> > >
> > > I’ve been working on a workload centric stress tool on and off for a
> > little
> > > bit in an effort to create something that will help with wider adoption
> > in
> > > stress testing. It differs from the stress we ship by including fully
> > > functional stress workloads as well as a validation process. The idea
> > being
> > > to be flexible enough to test both performance and correctness in LWT
> > and
> > > MVs as well as other arbitrary workloads.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_thelastpickle_tlp-2Dstress&d=DwIFaQ&c=adz96Xi0w1RHqtPMowiL2g&r=qK2RkRAsGtixYf0IgKlRBYLfTrXyOKED9OOTyMVvDf4&m=l_G2ByhfCyu3k9TzNVqiagdVQ8vOMJqHZvDq_JKvbiQ&s=f8gf_JCP6JRQIRkL_1R_zJOS_6gdAAsLleDr2PZHppE&e=
> >
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:28 PM Josh McKenzie <jmckenzie@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why not just branch a 4.0-rel and bugfix there and merge up while
> > still
> > > > accepting new features or improvements on trunk?
> > > >
> > > > I don't think the potential extra engagement in testing will balance
> > out
> > > > the atrophy and discouraging contributions / community engagement
> > we'd
> > > get
> > > > by deferring all improvements and new features in an open-ended way.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:33 PM sankalp kohli <kohlisankalp@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi cassandra-dev@,
> > > > >
> > > > > With the goal of making Cassandra's 4.0 the most stable major
> > release
> > > to
> > > > > date, we would like all committers of the project to consider
> > joining
> > > us
> > > > in
> > > > > dedicating their time and attention to testing, running, and fixing
> > > > issues
> > > > > in 4.0 between the September freeze and the 4.0 beta release. This
> > > would
> > > > > result in a freeze of new feature development on trunk or branches
> > > during
> > > > > this period, instead focusing on writing, improving, and running
> > tests
> > > or
> > > > > fixing and reviewing bugs or performance regressions found in 4.0
> > or
> > > > > earlier.
> > > > >
> > > > > How would this work?
> > > > >
> > > > > We propose that between the September freeze date and beta, a new
> > > branch
> > > > > would not be created and trunk would only have bug fixes and
> > > performance
> > > > > improvements committed to it. At the same time we do not want to
> > > > discourage
> > > > > community contributions. Not all contributors can be expected to be
> > > aware
> > > > > of such a decision or may be new to the project. In cases where new
> > > > > features are contributed during this time, the contributor can be
> > > > informed
> > > > > of the current status of the release process, be encouraged to
> > > contribute
> > > > > to testing or bug fixing, and have their feature reviewed after the
> > > beta
> > > > is
> > > > > reached.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What happens when beta is reached?
> > > > >
> > > > > Ideally, contributors who have made significant contributions to
> > the
> > > > > release will stick around to continue testing between beta and
> > final
> > > > > release. Any additional folks who continue this focus would also be
> > > > greatly
> > > > > appreciated.
> > > > >
> > > > > What about before the freeze?
> > > > >
> > > > > Testing new features is of course important. This isn't meant to
> > > > discourage
> > > > > development – only to enable us to focus on testing and hardening
> > 4.0
> > > to
> > > > > deliver Cassandra's most stable major release. We would like to see
> > > > > adoption of 4.0 happen much more quickly than its predecessor.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for considering this proposal,
> > > > > Sankalp Kohli
> > > >
> > > --
> > > Jon Haddad
> > >
> >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.rustyrazorblade.com&d=DwIFaQ&c=adz96Xi0w1RHqtPMowiL2g&r=qK2RkRAsGtixYf0IgKlRBYLfTrXyOKED9OOTyMVvDf4&m=l_G2ByhfCyu3k9TzNVqiagdVQ8vOMJqHZvDq_JKvbiQ&s=paSngQpMm3DhoWay8lDuWEYELVOrti8evQeT1LodXdY&e=
> >
> > > twitter: rustyrazorblade
> > >
>