Hi, Jakob,
> > Eh? Not sure what this means... > > I mean SAMZA-484 depends on SAMZA-482, and neither are committed. So Navina > is having to post Yi's patch, as well as her own, on the JIRA. It makes it > really hard to do code reviews because you can't tell whether Yi made the > changes or Navina did. > > Just to add to the point. It is also difficult to always see a long list of changed files if the RB request is always based on the master. It is possible to have RB request based on another RB request (I have tried it before). But what happens if the base RB request is cancelled/discarded? RB is not designed to track the revision changes in a dependency chain. > Cheers, > Chris > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Jakob Homan <jgho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I want to avoid branches, > > Just curious, any reason for this? > > > > > and I also want to avoid revision control over JIRA > > Eh? Not sure what this means... > > > > Thanks, > > jg > > > > On 4 February 2015 at 17:11, Chris Riccomini <criccom...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > Hey all, > > > > > > @Jakob, yeah I was thinking we'll follow our normal flow. RTC. I just > > > wanted to set expectation that the code committed might be not up to > our > > > normal quality initially (missing docs, no tests, etc). Until the > quality > > > is raised, we should think of this module as experimental. > > > > > > @Milinda, awesome! Thanks. :) > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Chris > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Milinda Pathirage < > > mpath...@umail.iu.edu> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Chris, > > >> > > >> Hope we no longer need the SQL API. I'll create a RB for Calcite > > >> integration. > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> Milinda > > >> > > >> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Chris Riccomini < > criccom...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > I think so. There was some RB downtime, but it just got fixed. Yi, > > >> Navina, > > >> > Milinda, can you make sure your JIRAs have up to date RBs? > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:24 AM, sriram <sriram....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Can we have updated RBs for all the three sub tasks before we > > commit? > > >> > This > > >> > > would help us to review even after we commit. > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Chris Riccomini < > > >> criccom...@apache.org> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hey all, > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Yi, Navina, and Milinda have been working on SAMZA-390 > sub-tickets > > >> > > related > > >> > > > to SQL operators. We're getting to the point where the amount of > > work > > >> > > > floating around is quite large, and some tickets build off of > > others. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I'm proposing that we commit this work into a samza-sql > submodule > > on > > >> > > > master, and treat this module as experimental. I want to avoid > > >> > branches, > > >> > > > and I also want to avoid revision control over JIRA. This means > > that > > >> > > there > > >> > > > will probably be a fair amount of commits/JIRAs on this module > as > > we > > >> > > > iterate, but I think that's OK. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Does this sound good to everyone? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Cheers, > > >> > > > Chris > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Milinda Pathirage > > >> > > >> PhD Student | Research Assistant > > >> School of Informatics and Computing | Data to Insight Center > > >> Indiana University > > >> > > >> twitter: milindalakmal > > >> skype: milinda.pathirage > > >> blog: http://milinda.pathirage.org > > >> > > >
