[Starting a new thread to not hijack the voting one...]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have to disagree about comments about process since in order:
> * there was a discussion thread before any POCs were created where Gradle
> and Bazel were brought up
> * a PR was created that was brought up on dev@ and available to anyone for
> comment
> * on the discussion thread it was specifically brought up that empirical
> evidence was needed by Ken and Romain before a meaningful vote could be had
> * PR was merged on to master because testing infrastructure is heavily tied
> to the master branch because of
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3047 and
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3120. Also the PR specifically
> said it was to compare Maven/Gradle as described in the PR and using Jenkins
> was valuable since the information would be public and reproducible.
> * and now there is this vote thread

I agree with JB in that there may have been a perception that we were
switching to Gradle without sufficient community feedback. I agree
with Reuven (and you) that the actions were completely reasonable and
done with good intent.

The only thing I would have done differently (in hindsight!) is been
very explicit on the list "we're merging this to gather more data, any
objections?" I, personally, don't think that needed a vote, but this
would have been a chance for those who felt differently to call for a
vote, which would have been respected if anyone felt strongly.

- Robert


> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> I agree with what both JB and Reuven had to say about process.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:45 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Reuven,
>> >
>> > I know that the merge was not malicious. No problem at all ;)
>> >
>> > It's just about the community and consensus.
>> >
>> > For instance, I did discussion + vote to have a consensus about Spark 2
>> > support & upgrade.
>> > It's not a big deal, but we have to be careful with our communities
>> > (here
>> > the dev community, for the release schedule/cycle it's more our user
>> > community ;)).
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Regards
>> > JB
>> >
>> > On 11/29/2017 04:33 PM, Reuven Lax wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for bringing this up JB.
>> >>
>> >> I don't think the merge to master was done maliciously. We don't
>> >> usually
>> >> vote before merging PRs, and since that PR did not affect the normal
>> >> build
>> >> process. It was done to gather data about how well Gradle works, not to
>> >> force any one outcome (one possible result of the data could have been
>> >> that
>> >> Gradle was slower), I can see how it wasn't obvious that we needed to
>> >> vote
>> >> before merging.
>> >>
>> >> However I also see how merging Gradle to master created the perception
>> >> that some people were trying to force the issue forward without a vote,
>> >> and
>> >> perceptions like that can be damaging to community (regardless of good
>> >> intentions). It's good we're voting now, and let's be more careful
>> >> about
>> >> such things in the future.
>> >>
>> >> Reuven
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]
>> >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>     -0
>> >>
>> >>     It's not for the change itself (gradle build is interesting) but
>> >> for
>> >> the
>> >>     process used here, which, IMHO, is not clean.
>> >>
>> >>     My major concern is the fact that gradle build has been merged on
>> >> master
>> >>     before the vote. I would have start the vote based on the
>> >> discussion
>> >> and PR
>> >>     branch (acting as a PoC).
>> >>
>> >>     I have the feeling that part of the dev community already decided
>> >> to
>> >> change
>> >>     to gradle and pushed without waiting for the whole consensus.
>> >>
>> >>     I don't want to "block" this change, but I wanted to raise my
>> >> concern
>> >> from a
>> >>     community standpoint.
>> >>
>> >>     Regards
>> >>     JB
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>     On 11/28/2017 06:55 PM, Lukasz Cwik wrote:
>> >>
>> >>         This is a procedural vote for migrating to use Gradle for all
>> >> our
>> >>         development related processes (building, testing, and
>> >> releasing).
>> >> A
>> >>         majority vote will signal that:
>> >>         * Gradle build files will be supported and maintained alongside
>> >> any
>> >>         remaining Maven files.
>> >>         * Once Gradle is able to replace Maven in a specific process
>> >> (or
>> >> portion
>> >>         thereof), Maven will no longer be maintained for said process
>> >> (or
>> >>         portion thereof) and will be removed.
>> >>
>> >>         +1 I support the process change
>> >>         0 I am indifferent to the process change
>> >>         -1 I would like to remain with our current processes
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>         Below is a summary of information contained in the disucssion
>> >> thread
>> >>         comparing Gradle and Maven:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/225dddcfc78f39bbb296a0d2bbef1caf37e17677c7e5573f0b6fe253@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/225dddcfc78f39bbb296a0d2bbef1caf37e17677c7e5573f0b6fe253@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
>> >>
>> >>         Gradle (mins)
>> >>         min: 25.04
>> >>         max: 160.14
>> >>         median: 45.78
>> >>         average: 52.19
>> >>         stdev: 30.80
>> >>
>> >>         Maven (mins)
>> >>         min: 56.86
>> >>         max: 216.55 (actually > 240 mins because this data does not
>> >> include
>> >>         timeouts)
>> >>         median: 87.93
>> >>         average: 109.10
>> >>         stdev: 48.01
>> >>
>> >>         Maven
>> >>         Java Support: Mature
>> >>         Python Support: None (via mvn exec plugin)
>> >>         Go Support: Rudimentary (via mvn plugin)
>> >>         Protobuf Support: Rudimentary (via mvn plugin)
>> >>         Docker Support: Rudimentary (via mvn plugin)
>> >>         ASF Release Automation: Mature
>> >>         Jenkins Support: Mature
>> >>         Configuration Language: XML
>> >>         Multiple Java Versions: Yes
>> >>         Static Analysis Tools: Some
>> >>         ASF Release Audit Tool (RAT): Rudimentary (plugin complete and
>> >>         longstanding but poor)
>> >>         IntelliJ Integration: Mature
>> >>         Eclipse Integration: Mature
>> >>         Extensibility: Mature (updated per JB from discuss thread)
>> >>         Number of GitHub Projects Using It: 146k
>> >>         Continuous build daemon: None
>> >>         Incremental build support: None (note that this is not the same
>> >> as
>> >>         incremental compile support offered by the compiler plugin)
>> >>         Intra-module dependencies: Rudimentary (requires the use of
>> >> many
>> >>         profiles to get per runner dependencies)
>> >>
>> >>         Gradle
>> >>         Java Support: Mature
>> >>         Python Support: Rudimentary (pygradle, lacks pypi support)
>> >>         Go Support: Rudimentary (gogradle plugin)
>> >>         Protobuf Support: Rudimentary (via protobuf plugin)
>> >>         Docker Support: Rudimentary (via docker plugin)
>> >>         ASF Release Automation: ?
>> >>         Jenkins Support: Mature
>> >>         Configuration Language: Groovy
>> >>         Multiple Java Versions: Yes
>> >>         Static Analysis Tools: Some
>> >>         ASF Release Audit Tool (RAT): Rudimentary (plugin just calls
>> >> Apache
>> >>         Maven ANT plugin)
>> >>         IntelliJ Integration: Mature
>> >>         Eclipse Integration: Mature
>> >>         Extensibility: Mature
>> >>         Number of GitHub Projects Using It: 122k
>> >>         Continuous build daemon: Mature
>> >>         Incremental build support: Mature
>> >>         Intra-module dependencies: Mature (via configurations)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>     --     Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> >>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> >>     http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> >>     Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
>

Reply via email to