The problems we're facing with our continuous integration are difficult to capture in a single JIRA ticket given the scope and complexity of the work involved. We could create some "umbrella" tickets with topics like "Eliminate Travis CI-specific logic from testing scripts" and attach child JIRA issues to that
On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 6:53 AM Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Do we have ticket to track this? > > ?? Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> > > ________________________________ > From: Andy Grove <andygrov...@gmail.com> > Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 11:46:18 PM > To: dev <dev@arrow.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Understanding Arrow's CI problems and needs > > I've started a new section to discuss proposals and current initiatives. I > know some of us have been working on some things but without much > coordination so far. It would be good to track these efforts so everyone > can comment on them. > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:11 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It seems some time has passed here. Would some others like to read the > > document and comment? This is important stuff. > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:20 PM Krisztián Szűcs > > <szucs.kriszt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > The current document greatly summarizes the current situation, but in > > > order to properly compare and eventually select a solution we need a > > > a detailed list of explicit features with some sort of classification, > > like > > > should/must have. For example our future CI system must support > > > "PRs from forks". After filling this table for the alternatives we can > > > have a much clearer picture. > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 4:06 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I reviewed the document, thanks for putting it together! I think it > > > > captures most of the requirements and the challenges that we are > > > > currently facing. I think that anyone who is actively contributing to > > > > the project or merging pull requests should read this document since > > > > this affects all of us. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 1:55 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Neal for starting this discussion. I will review and comment. > > > > > > > > > > I will say that as a maintainer the current situation is very nearly > > > > > intolerable. As by far and away the most prolific merger-of-PRs [1], > > > > > I've been negatively affected by the long queueing times and delayed > > > > > feedback cycles. The project would not be able to accommodate 2x or > > 5x > > > > > the volume of PRs that we have now, and so it is urgent that we > > > > > develop a scalable cross-platform CI solution that is under this > > > > > community's control and does not require a high maintenance burden, > > so > > > > > if we need to increase the amount of resources dedicated to CI we can > > > > > unilaterally do so. > > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/wesm/78bfda4cef3b23a5193cf4fb8a6540fb > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 1:38 PM Neal Richardson > > > > > <neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Over the last few months, I've seen a lot of frustration and > > > > > > discussion around the shortcomings of our current CI. I'm also > > seeing > > > > > > debate over a few possible solutions; unfortunately, the debates > > tend > > > > > > not to resolve in a clear, decisive way, and we end up having the > > same > > > > > > debates repeatedly. > > > > > > > > > > > > In my experience, this pattern often happens when there's not a > > shared > > > > > > understanding of the problems we're trying to solve--it's hard to > > > > > > agree on a solution if we don't agree on the problem. To help us > > reach > > > > > > consensus on the problems, I've started a document: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fToW48TO-B9T8VRi0_Z30fDJkjOrBisc-Fr8Epl50s4/edit# > > > > > > > > > > > > Please have a look and add/edit freely. I've tried to capture the > > > > > > arguments I've seen go by the mailing list, as well as some from my > > > > > > own experience, but if I've mischaracterized anything, please > > rectify. > > > > > > > > > > > > I know several people have been exploring some potential solutions, > > > > > > and I hope this document can help us begin to discuss their > > relative > > > > > > merits more objectively and practically. > > > > > > > > > > > > Neal > > > > > >
