Dmitriy, You confirmed that fix should be reverted and reworked last Friday. Why it still not reverted?
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:46 AM Dmitrii Ryabov <somefire...@gmail.com> wrote: > Agree, it is reasonable to revert. > пт, 7 дек. 2018 г. в 18:44, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: > > > > Hi Ilya, > > > > thank you for noticing. > > > > Calling to fail is equal to re-throw, > > > > throw new AssertionFailedError(message); > > > > So, yes, for now it is absolutely valid reason to revert and rework fix > > > > - as Nikolay suggested to reduce method override ocurrences. > > - and with transferring this exception into GridAbstractTest and > > correctly failing test. > > > > Sincerely, > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > пт, 7 дек. 2018 г. в 18:38, Ilya Lantukh <ilant...@gridgain.com>: > > > > > Unfortunately, this FailureHandler doesn't seem to work. I wrote a test > > > that reproduces a bug and should fail. It prints the following text > into > > > log, but the test still passes "successfully": > > > > > > [2018-12-07 > > > > > > > 18:28:23,800][ERROR][sys-stripe-1-#345%recovery.GridPointInTimeRecoveryCacheNoAffinityExchangeTest1%][IgniteTestResources] > > > Critical system error detected. Will be handled accordingly to > configured > > > handler [hnd=TestFailingFailureHandler [], failureCtx=FailureContext > > > [type=CRITICAL_ERROR, err=java.lang.IllegalStateException: Unable to > find > > > consistentId by UUID [nodeId=80dd2ec6-1913-4a5c-a839-630315c00003, > > > topVer=AffinityTopologyVersion [topVer=12, minorTopVer=0]]]] > > > java.lang.IllegalStateException: Unable to find consistentId by UUID > > > [nodeId=80dd2ec6-1913-4a5c-a839-630315c00003, > > > topVer=AffinityTopologyVersion [topVer=12, minorTopVer=0]] > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.discovery.ConsistentIdMapper.mapToCompactId(ConsistentIdMapper.java:62) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.discovery.ConsistentIdMapper.mapToCompactIds(ConsistentIdMapper.java:123) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxManager.newTxRecord(IgniteTxManager.java:2507) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxManager.logTxRecord(IgniteTxManager.java:2483) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxAdapter.state(IgniteTxAdapter.java:1226) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxAdapter.state(IgniteTxAdapter.java:1054) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler.startRemoteTx(IgniteTxHandler.java:1836) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler.processDhtTxPrepareRequest(IgniteTxHandler.java:1180) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler.access$400(IgniteTxHandler.java:118) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler$5.apply(IgniteTxHandler.java:222) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler$5.apply(IgniteTxHandler.java:220) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.processMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:1059) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.onMessage0(GridCacheIoManager.java:584) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.handleMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:383) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.handleMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:309) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.access$100(GridCacheIoManager.java:100) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager$1.onMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:299) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.invokeListener(GridIoManager.java:1568) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.processRegularMessage0(GridIoManager.java:1196) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.access$4200(GridIoManager.java:127) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager$9.run(GridIoManager.java:1092) > > > at > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.util.StripedExecutor$Stripe.body(StripedExecutor.java:505) > > > at > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.util.worker.GridWorker.run(GridWorker.java:120) > > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748) > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:01 PM Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> We stop, for now, then you will chill a > > > > >> little bit, then you will have an absolutely fantastic weekend, > and > > > then > > > > on > > > > >> Monday, Dec 10 we will continue this discussion in a positive and > > > > >> constructive manner. > > > > Agree > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 3:55 PM Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Anton. > > > > > > > > > > I discussed this fix privately with Dmitriy Pavlov. > > > > > > > > > > 1. We had NoOpHandler for ALL tests before this merge. > > > > > 2. Dmitry Ryabov will remove all copypasted code soon. > > > > > > > > > > So, this fix make things better. > > > > > > > > > > I think we shouldn't revert it. > > > > > > > > > > I think we should continue work to turn off NoOpHandler in all > tests. > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov, can you do it, as a committer of this patch? > > > > > > > > > > On 12/6/18 3:02 PM, Anton Vinogradov wrote: > > > > > >>> I still hope Anton will do the first bunch of tests research to > > > > > > demonstrate > > > > > >>> the idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy, > > > > > > Just want to remind you that we already spend time here because > of > > > > > > unacceptable code merge situation. > > > > > > Such merges should NEVER happen again. > > > > > > Please, next time make sure that code you merge has no massive > > > > > duplication > > > > > > and fixes without proper reason investigation. > > > > > > Committer always MUST be ready to explain each symbol inside > code he > > > > > merged. > > > > > > The situation when you have no clue why it written this way > > > > unacceptable. > > > > > > > > > > > > Feel free to start a discussion at private in case you have some > > > > > objections. > > > > > > But, hope you agree and will help us to solve the issue instead. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitrii, > > > > > >>> Anton, I mean `copy-paste reduce` ticket. I'll try to describe > the > > > > > > reasons for > > > > > >>> no-op in tests. Then, we can create tickets to fix this cases > if > > > > > needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > In case no-one will be ready to start a proper fix (investigate > why > > > > every > > > > > > no-op required and create tickets for each problem) before Friday > > > > > evening, > > > > > > the code will be rolled back. > > > > > > Simple no-op is better that same but overcomplicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 2:14 PM Dmitrii Ryabov < > somefire...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Anton, I mean `copy-paste reduce` ticket. I'll try to describe > > > reasons > > > > > for > > > > > >> no-op in tests. Then, we can create tickets to fix this cases if > > > > needed. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г., 13:53 Dmitriy Pavlov dpav...@apache.org: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> BTW, No-Op or StopNode-FailTest in case of a deep investigation > > > will > > > > > >> always > > > > > >>> require to understand what test does and what it tests. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> So we can get a positive outcome from this research if we > agree to > > > > add > > > > > >>> - a small description to each test about the reason for > existing of > > > > > this > > > > > >>> test, > > > > > >>> - what is the expected behavior of the product in the test, > and how > > > > it > > > > > is > > > > > >>> checked? > > > > > >>> - failure handler influence, etc. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> I still hope Anton will do the first bunch of tests research to > > > > > >> demonstrate > > > > > >>> the idea. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 13:39, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Dmitrii, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>>> I agree with Nikolay's solution. If no one minds, I'll > create > > > > ticket > > > > > >>> for > > > > > >>>>>> appropriate changes and recheck issues. > > > > > >>>> Do you mean 'copy-paste reduce' ticket or check/fix of all > tests > > > > with > > > > > >>> no-op > > > > > >>>> to have a proper handler? > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Just want to make sure that copy-paste minimization is not the > > > final > > > > > >>> step. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 1:24 PM Павлухин Иван < > vololo...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> Dmitrii Ryabov, > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Your comments sounds reasonable to me. Marker base class > approach > > > > > >>>>> looks good to me so far. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> P.S. I had even worse name in mind 'StopGaps' =) > > > > > >>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 13:08, Dmitrii Ryabov < > > > somefire...@gmail.com > > > > >: > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Ivan, I think `Workarounds` class isn't good idea, because > it > > > > looks > > > > > >>>> like > > > > > >>>>> we > > > > > >>>>>> create stable workarounds, which will never be fixed. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> I agree with Nikolay's solution. If no one minds, I'll > create > > > > > >> ticket > > > > > >>>> for > > > > > >>>>>> appropriate changes and recheck issues. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г., 12:17 Anton Vinogradov a...@apache.org: > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> Folks, thank's everyone for solution research. > > > > > >>>>>>> I'm ok with Nikolay approach in case that's not a final > step. > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:11 PM Павлухин Иван < > > > > > >> vololo...@gmail.com > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Nikolay, > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> I meant "not expensive" by "cheap". And I meant that it is > > > good > > > > > >>>> that > > > > > >>>>>>>> it cheap =). And I said it to contrast with "expensive" > ~100 > > > > > >>> tests > > > > > >>>>>>>> investigation. And if we agree (mostly I would like an > opinion > > > > > >>> from > > > > > >>>>>>>> Dmitriy Ryabov as an original author) on a way how to > improve > > > > > >> the > > > > > >>>>>>>> patch then let's do it. > > > > > >>>>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 10:41, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > >> nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > >>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Dmitriy Ryabov, Dmitriy Pavlov, sorry. > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Of course it should be "NOT to blame author". > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sorry, one more time. > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г., 10:40 Dmitriy Pavlov > dpav...@apache.org: > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I hope you've misprinted here > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm here to blame the author. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> We can blame code but never coders. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Please see https://discourse.pi-hole.net/faq - has > > > > > >>> absolutely > > > > > >>>>>>> nothing > > > > > >>>>>>>> in > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> common with Apache Guides, but says the same things. It > is > > > > > >> a > > > > > >>>>>>> practical > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> necessity to maintain a friendly atmosphere. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 10:31, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > >>>> nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Ivan. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Accept the patch and bring an improvement to Ignite > > > > > >>> (and > > > > > >>>>>>> create > > > > > >>>>>>>> a> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ticket for further investigation). > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I support this idea. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Do we create the tickets already? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nikolay's patch [1] suggests a slightly different > > > > > >>> approach > > > > > >>>>> how to > > > > > >>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> same thing. And implementing that idea looks like a > > > > > >> cheap > > > > > >>>>>>>> refactoring. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I don't agree with your term "cheap". > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Do you think reducing copy paste code not worth it? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I see a hundreds issues that bring copypasted code in > the > > > > > >>>>>>>> product(Ignite > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and others). > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I insist, that we shouldn't accept patches with it. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm here to blame the author. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I want to improve this patch and make it easier to find > > > > > >> all > > > > > >>>>> places > > > > > >>>>>>>> with > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> NoOp handler to do the further investigation. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> В Чт, 06/12/2018 в 10:19 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Guys, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I asked what harm will applying the patch bring I have > > > > > >>> not > > > > > >>>>> got a > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> direct answer. But I think I got some pain points: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Anton does not like that reasons why ~100 tests > > > > > >>> require > > > > > >>>>> noop > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> handler are not clear. And might be several problems > > > > > >> are > > > > > >>>>> covered > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> there. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Nikolay suggests some code improvements. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nikolay's patch [1] suggests a slightly different > > > > > >>> approach > > > > > >>>>> how to > > > > > >>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> same thing. And implementing that idea looks like a > > > > > >> cheap > > > > > >>>>>>>> refactoring. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> But the idea of course could be discussed. Straight > > > > > >> away > > > > > >>> I > > > > > >>>>> can > > > > > >>>>>>>> suggest > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> another slightly different trick [2]. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Investigating why ~100 tests require noop handler > could > > > > > >>> be > > > > > >>>>>>> costly. > > > > > >>>>>>>> So, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> in that direction I see following options which can > > > > > >>> happen > > > > > >>>>> for > > > > > >>>>>>>> sure: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Accept the patch and bring an improvement to Ignite > > > > > >>> (and > > > > > >>>>>>> create > > > > > >>>>>>>> a > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ticket for further investigation). > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Revert the patch and loose an improvement. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> One might say that there is an option "Revert the > patch > > > > > >>> and > > > > > >>>>> then > > > > > >>>>>>>> do it > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> better" but I does not see anything (anyone) what can > > > > > >>>>> guarantee > > > > > >>>>>>> it. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> So, I personally prefer an option 1 against 2 because > I > > > > > >>>>> believe > > > > > >>>>>>>> that > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> it is good if the system "can make a progress". > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5584/files > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5586/files > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 21:22, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > >>>>> nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The closest analog to Noop handler is mute of test > > > > > >>>>> failure. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> By this commit, we had unmuted (possible) failures > > > > > >> in > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ~50000-~100=~49900 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> tests, and we’re still concerned about style or minor > > > > > >>>>> details > > > > > >>>>>>> if > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> no-op > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> was > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> copy-pasted, aren’t we? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you explain this idea a bit more? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand what is unmuted by discussed > > > > > >> commit. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 20:40, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > >>>>>>> nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, as an improvement to the code, this may > > > > > >> be > > > > > >>>>> better. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can prepare a full patch for NoOp handler. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton Vinogradov, do you agree with this approach? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 20:33, Dmitriy Pavlov < > > > > > >>>>>>> dpav...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, as an improvement to the code, this may > > > > > >> be > > > > > >>>>> better. > > > > > >>>>>>>> But > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> still, it > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not a reason to revert. And Anton mentioned > > > > > >>> something > > > > > >>>>> with > > > > > >>>>>>>> better > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exception > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handling/logging. Probably we will see an > > > > > >>>>> implementation as > > > > > >>>>>>>> well. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This case here is a big thing related to The > > > > > >> Apache > > > > > >>>>> Way, - > > > > > >>>>>>>> and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I'll > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explain > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why it makes me switched into fight-mode - until > > > > > >> we > > > > > >>>>> stop > > > > > >>>>>>> this > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. If > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PMCs (at least) are aware of patterns and > > > > > >>>>> anti-patterns in > > > > > >>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> community, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we will succeed as a project much more as with > > > > > >>> (only) > > > > > >>>>>>> perfect > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> code. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The closest analog to Noop handler is mute of > > > > > >> test > > > > > >>>>> failure. > > > > > >>>>>>>> By > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> this > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commit, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we had unmuted (possible) failures in > > > > > >>>>> ~50000-~100=~49900 > > > > > >>>>>>>> tests, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and we’re > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still concerned about style or minor details if > > > > > >>> no-op > > > > > >>>>> was > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> copy-pasted, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren’t we? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To everyone arguing about the number of tests we > > > > > >>> are > > > > > >>>>>>> allowed > > > > > >>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> have with > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no-op: please visit this page > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&tab=mutedProblems&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=__all_branches__ > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It says: Muted tests: 3154. Are there any > > > > > >>>> disagreements > > > > > >>>>>>>> here? Why > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> there > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no insistent disagreement/not happy PMCs with > > > > > >>>>> absolutely > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> unconditionally > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> muted failures? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any reason now to continue the discussion about > > > > > >>>>> reverting > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> absolutely > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positive contribution into product stability from > > > > > >>>>> Dmitrii > > > > > >>>>>>> R.? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moreover, Dmitrii Ryabov is trying to solve odd > > > > > >>> mutes > > > > > >>>>>>>> problem, as > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> well, to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> locate mutes with links resolved issues in the TC > > > > > >>>> Bot. > > > > > >>>>> Is > > > > > >>>>>>> he > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> deserved to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read denouncing comments about the contribution? > > > > > >> I > > > > > >>>>> guess, > > > > > >>>>>>> no, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> especially > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the commenter is not going to help/contribute a > > > > > >>>> better > > > > > >>>>> fix. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is now a paramount thing for me if people in > > > > > >>>> this > > > > > >>>>>>> thread > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> will > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> join > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> process or not. People may be not happy with some > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> decisions/code/style, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some people are more often unhappy than others. > > > > > >>> More > > > > > >>>>> you > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> contribute,- more > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can decide. If you don't contribute at all - > > > > > >> I > > > > > >>>>> don't > > > > > >>>>>>>> care too > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> much > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about just opinions, I can accept facts. To > > > > > >> provide > > > > > >>>>> facts > > > > > >>>>>>> we > > > > > >>>>>>>> need > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to do > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deep research, how can someone know if the test > > > > > >>>> should > > > > > >>>>> be > > > > > >>>>>>>> no-op > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> or > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> not > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without deep analysis? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, if someone comes to list and provide just > > > > > >>>>> negative > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> feedback, people > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will stop writing here. Probably no-op was > > > > > >> enabled > > > > > >>>>> without > > > > > >>>>>>>> proper > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion because of this, someone may be afraid > > > > > >>> of > > > > > >>>>>>> sharing > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> this. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Result: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some of us knew it only now. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you need to make Ignite quite toxic place to > > > > > >>> have > > > > > >>>> an > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> absolutely > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> perfect > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code with just a few of arguing-resistant > > > > > >>>>> contributors? I > > > > > >>>>>>>> believe > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> not, and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you don't need to be reminded 'community first > > > > > >>>>> principle'. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 19:43, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > >>>>>>>> nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should avoid copy paste code instead > > > > > >>> of > > > > > >>>>>>> thinking > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> about Apache > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Way all the time :) > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, I propose to return to the code! > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should use some kind of marker base > > > > > >>>> class > > > > > >>>>> for > > > > > >>>>>>> a > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> cases > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> with > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoOpHandler. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This has several advantages, comparing with > > > > > >>> current > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> implementation: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. No copy paste code > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Reduce changes. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. All usages of NoOpHandler can be easily > > > > > >> found > > > > > >>>>> with IDE > > > > > >>>>>>>> or > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> grep > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> search. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've prepared proof of concept pull request to > > > > > >>>>>>> demonstrate > > > > > >>>>>>>> my > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> approach > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can go further and prepare full fix. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > > > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5584/files > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 18:29, Dmitriy Pavlov < > > > > > >>>>>>>> dpav...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Folks, let me explain one thing which is not > > > > > >>>>> related > > > > > >>>>>>>> much to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> fix > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but it is more about how we interact. If > > > > > >>> someone > > > > > >>>>> will > > > > > >>>>>>>> just > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> come to the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and say it is not good commit, it is a silly > > > > > >>>>> solution > > > > > >>>>>>>> and say > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rework these patches - it is a road to > > > > > >> nowhere. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If someone sees the potential to make things > > > > > >>>>> better he > > > > > >>>>>>>> or she > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> suggest > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (or commits patch). This is named do-ocracy, > > > > > >>>> those > > > > > >>>>> who > > > > > >>>>>>>> do can > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> make a > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And this topic it is a perfect example of how > > > > > >>>>> do-ocracy > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> should > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> (and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not) work. We have a potentially hidden > > > > > >> problem > > > > > >>>>> (we had > > > > > >>>>>>>> it > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> before > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> R. commit), I believe 3 or 7 tests may be > > > > > >> found > > > > > >>>>> after > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> re-checks of > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eventually, these tests will get their > > > > > >>> stop-node > > > > > >>>>>>> handler > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> after > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revisiting > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no-op test list. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have ~100 tests and several people who > > > > > >> care. > > > > > >>>>> Anton, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Andrew, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitrii & > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy, Nikolay, probably Ed, and we have > > > > > >>> 100/6 > > > > > >>>> = > > > > > >>>>> 18 > > > > > >>>>>>>> tests > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> double > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for each contributor. We can make things > > > > > >> better > > > > > >>>> if > > > > > >>>>> we > > > > > >>>>>>> go > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> together. And > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how a community works. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If someone just come to list to criticize and > > > > > >>>>> enforces > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> someone > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> else > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to do > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all things, he or she probably don't want to > > > > > >>>>> improve > > > > > >>>>>>>> project > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> code but > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other goals. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 18:08, Andrey Kuznetsov > > > > > >> < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> stku...@gmail.com>: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I can see from the above discussion, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tests in these classes check fail cases > > > > > >>> when > > > > > >>>>> we > > > > > >>>>>>>> expect > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> critical > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like node stop or exception thrown > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, this copy-n-paste-style change is > > > > > >> caused > > > > > >>> by > > > > > >>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> imperfect logic > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existing tests, that should be reworked in > > > > > >>> more > > > > > >>>>>>> robust > > > > > >>>>>>>> way, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> e.g. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> custom failure handlers. Dmitrii just > > > > > >>> revealed > > > > > >>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>> existing > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> flaws, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 17:54, Nikolay > > > > > >> Izhikov < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Igniters. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm agree with Anton Vinogradov. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should avoid commits like [1] > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Copy paste coding style is well known > > > > > >> anti > > > > > >>>>> pattern. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't we have another option to do same > > > > > >> fix > > > > > >>>>> with > > > > > >>>>>>>> better > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> styling? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Accepting such patches leads to the > > > > > >> further > > > > > >>>>> tickets > > > > > >>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> cleanup > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mess > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches brings to the code base. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Example of cleanup [2] > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's take a significant amount of my and > > > > > >>>> Maxim > > > > > >>>>> time > > > > > >>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> made and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cleanup patch. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We shouldn't accept patch with copy paste > > > > > >>>>>>>> "improvements". > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I really like your perfectionism > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not about perfectionism it's about > > > > > >>>> keeping > > > > > >>>>>>> code > > > > > >>>>>>>> base > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> clean. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I'm going to rollback changes in > > > > > >> case > > > > > >>>>>>> arguments > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> will > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> not be > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provided. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to rollback and rework this commit. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At least, we should reduce copy paste > > > > > >> code. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/b94a3c2fe3a272a31fad62b80505d16f87eab2dd > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/eb8038f65285559c5424eba2882b0de0583ea7af > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 17:28, Anton > > > > > >>> Vinogradov > > > > > >>>> < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org>: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But why should we make all things > > > > > >>>> perfect > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a single fix? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I said, I'm ok in case someone ready > > > > > >>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>> continue :) > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, we should avoid such > > > > > >>> over-copy-pasted > > > > > >>>>>>> commits > > > > > >>>>>>>> in > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:13 PM Andrey > > > > > >>>>> Mashenkov < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we have TC run results for the PR > > > > > >>>> before > > > > > >>>>>>>> massive > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> failure > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handler > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallbacks were added? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's create a ticket to investigate > > > > > >>>>>>> possibility > > > > > >>>>>>>> of > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> using any > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaningful > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure handler for such tests with > > > > > >> TC > > > > > >>>>> report > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> attached. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM Anton > > > > > >>>>>>> Vinogradov < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's ok in case someone ready to do > > > > > >>>> this > > > > > >>>>> (get > > > > > >>>>>>>> rid > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> of > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> all > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no-op > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explain > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why it's a better choice). > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Explicit confirmation required. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Otherwise, only rollback is an > > > > > >>> option. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 4:29 PM > > > > > >>> Dmitriy > > > > > >>>>>>> Pavlov < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dpav...@apache.org> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton, if you care enough here > > > > > >> will > > > > > >>>>> you try > > > > > >>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> research a > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests? Or you are asking others > > > > > >> to > > > > > >>> do > > > > > >>>>>>> things > > > > > >>>>>>>> for > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> you, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like idea from Andrew to create > > > > > >>>>> ticket > > > > > >>>>>>> and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> check > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> these > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moving towards 0....10 tests with > > > > > >>>>> noop. It > > > > > >>>>>>> is > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> easy > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> locate > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overridden method now. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So threat this change as > > > > > >>> contributed > > > > > >>>>>>>> mechanism > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> for > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> failing > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for you? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г., 15:59 Anton > > > > > >>>>> Vinogradov > > > > > >>>>>>> < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't get. What is the > > > > > >>>>> problem in > > > > > >>>>>>>> saving > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> No-Op for > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> several > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should we keep No-Op for > > > > > >> all? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Several (less than 10) is ok to > > > > > >>> me > > > > > >>>>> with > > > > > >>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> proper > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explanation > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fail and why no-op is a better > > > > > >>>>> choice. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100+++ copy-pasted no-op > > > > > >> handlers > > > > > >>>>> are not > > > > > >>>>>>>> ok! > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't ask you to re-do > > > > > >> this > > > > > >>>>> change, > > > > > >>>>>>>> I ask > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstrate > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approach for tests which > > > > > >>>>>>> intentionally > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> activate > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handler. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You asking me to provide > > > > > >> approach > > > > > >>>>> without > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> explanation > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fail > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without no-op handler? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My approach is to rollback this > > > > > >>>> fix, > > > > > >>>>>>>> reopen the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> issue > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> properly. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Make a proper investigation > > > > > >>> first. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Finally, let's stop this game. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have to discuss the reasons > > > > > >>> why > > > > > >>>>> tests > > > > > >>>>>>>> fail. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case no-one checked "why" > > > > > >>> before > > > > > >>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>> fix was > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> merged > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> able > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> start doing this after > > > > > >> rollback. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 3:49 PM > > > > > >>>> Eduard > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Shangareev > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guys, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't get. What is the > > > > > >>> problem > > > > > >>>>> in > > > > > >>>>>>>> saving > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> No-Op for > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> several > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should we keep No-Op for all? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 3:20 > > > > > >> PM > > > > > >>>>> Павлухин > > > > > >>>>>>>> Иван > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vololo...@gmail.com> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes I meant that patch. > > > > > >> And I > > > > > >>>>> would > > > > > >>>>>>>> like to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> respell > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "massive > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no-op handler restore" to > > > > > >>> "use > > > > > >>>>> no-op > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> failure > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> handler > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assumed". > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 15:09, > > > > > >>>>> Dmitriy > > > > > >>>>>>>> Pavlov > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dpav...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitrii Ryabov explained > > > > > >>>> these > > > > > >>>>>>> tests > > > > > >>>>>>>> are > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly ok > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failures > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these tests do test > > > > > >>> failures. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton, there is no reason > > > > > >>> to > > > > > >>>>> revert > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> other's > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributions > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how to do things better. > > > > > >> A > > > > > >>>> lot > > > > > >>>>> of > > > > > >>>>>>>> people > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> can do > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should we revert > > > > > >> everything > > > > > >>>>> I've > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> contributed? I > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hope > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can do things > > > > > >>> better, > > > > > >>>>> just > > > > > >>>>>>>> commit > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> further > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> improvements. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be happy if you > > > > > >> contribute > > > > > >>>> some > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> improvements > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> later. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you would like to > > > > > >> revert > > > > > >>>> by > > > > > >>>>>>> veto, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> please > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justify > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intent. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would discuss it with all > > > > > >>>>>>> community, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> please feel > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convince > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в > > > > > >> 14:53, > > > > > >>>>>>> Павлухин > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Иван < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vololo...@gmail.com > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Anton, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you please > > > > > >>> summarize > > > > > >>>>> what > > > > > >>>>>>>> does > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aforementioned > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worse? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I see, the patch > > > > > >>> added a > > > > > >>>>> very > > > > > >>>>>>>> good > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> thing -- > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaningful > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handler in tests. And I > > > > > >>>>> think it > > > > > >>>>>>> is > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> really > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> harm and does it > > > > > >>> overweight > > > > > >>>>>>>> positive > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> result? And > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в > > > > > >>> 14:03, > > > > > >>>>> Anton > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Vinogradov < > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's an incorrect > > > > > >>> idea > > > > > >>>>> to ask > > > > > >>>>>>>> me to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> provide > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PR > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> properly since I'm > > > > > >> not > > > > > >>> an > > > > > >>>>>>> author > > > > > >>>>>>>> or > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> reviewer. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, I, as a > > > > > >> community > > > > > >>>>> member, > > > > > >>>>>>>> ask > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> you > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explain > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case you're not > > > > > >> able > > > > > >>>> to > > > > > >>>>>>>> provide > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explanation > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rollback > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's not acceptable > > > > > >>> to > > > > > >>>>> merge > > > > > >>>>>>>> fix of > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> unknown > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> least, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "100 > > > > > >>>>>>>>> >
