So I've gotten `make check` passing against a merge of master into the `prototype/fdb-layer` branch. I ended up finding a flaky test and a bug in a recent commit to master. I've just merged a fix for the flaky test and Bob is working on a patch for the buffered_response feature.
Once those are both merged I'll re-run the merge and name that branch `main`. Once that happens we'll need to work through a to-do list. Things I know that are on that list: 1. File infra ticket to have them change our GitHub setting for the default branch to `main`. 2. Copy branch protection rules from `master` to `main` 3. Steps 1 and 2 for all our `apache/couchdb-$repo` repositories 4. Update Jenkins config 5. Figure out FreeBSD builder situation 6. Probably other stuff 7. Eventually rename current `master` to something else so as to avoid confusion Assuming no one objects beforehand, I'll start the ball rolling with Infra on Monday. Paul On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:11 PM Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote: > > Have been asking for it for a while ;) obviously +1. > > Be aware that Jenkinsfile.full post-merge will probably fail because, at > the very least, the FreeBSD hosts won't have fdb and can't run docker to > containerise it. This will need some exploration to resolve but > shouldn't be a blocker. > > The Jenkins setup will also need slight changes when we rename branches. > Also keep in mind other repos need the branch renaming, too. ASF Infra > can do the GitHub dance to change the name of the main branch. > > -Joan "about time" Touzet > > On 2020-09-09 2:05 p.m., Robert Samuel Newson wrote: > > Agree that its time to get the fdb-layer work into master, that's where > > couchdb 4.0 should be being created. > > > > thanks for preserving the imported ebtree history. > > > >> On 9 Sep 2020, at 17:28, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> The merge on this turned out to be a lot more straightforward so I > >> think its probably the way to go. I've got a failing test in > >> couch_views_active_tasks_test but it appears to be flaky rather than a > >> merge error. I'll work though getting `make check` to complete and > >> then send another update. > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/tree/prototype/fdb-layer-final-merge > >> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/commit/873ccb4882f2e984c25f59ad0fd0a0677b9d4477 > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 10:29 AM Paul Davis <paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Howdy folks! > >>> > >>> I've just gone through a rebase of `prototype/fdb-layer` against > >>> master. Its not quite finished because the ebtree import went wrong > >>> during rebase due to a weirdness of the history. > >>> > >>> I have a PR up for the rebase into master for people to look at [1]. > >>> Although the more important comparison is likely with the current > >>> `prototype/fdb-layer` that can be found at [2]. > >>> > >>> Given the ebtree aspect, as well as the fact that I get labeled as the > >>> committer for all commits when doing a rebase I'm also wondering if we > >>> shouldn't turn this into a merge in this instance. I'll work up a > >>> second branch that shows that diff as well that we could then rebase > >>> onto master. > >>> > >>> Regardless, I'd appreciate if we could get some eyeballs on the diff > >>> and then finally merge this work to the default branch so its the main > >>> line development going forward. > >>> > >>> Paul > >>> > >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/3137 > >>> [2] > >>> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/compare/prototype/fdb-layer...prototype/fdb-layer-final-rebase > >
