Seems to be enough consensus that this is beneficial. I took a look at the bylaws and it doesn't say anything specific there about an official review process. Is there a need to start a separate vote thread before making a change like this?
I would be in favor of allowing both for a little bit, if it is a significant improvement we can move to completely deprecate reviewboard. On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> wrote: > What did we decide here? > > Are we going to move forward with trying out pull requests? If so, do we > want to start having everyone do it or suggest only one or two do it to > start? > > thoughts? > Jacques > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > I can't remember the rule. I think it was 3gb and 15 minutes. In order > > to get under 3 gb, I think we need to run single threaded. Last I > checked, > > running with 4 threads on dedicated hardware completes in ~12 minutes. > > However, the Travis instances used to be really slow virtual machines. > I'm > > sure a solution can be found but I think we'd need some concerted effort > on > > reducing the test footprint. > > > > We talked before (Daniel's suggestion) about treating more of the tests > as > > integration tests. This would help as much of the test time is spent > > starting and stopping Drillbits for each test class. If we only did this > > once for all those tests, the footprint would be much smaller. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > We tried Travis before. The problem is that travis's nodes aren't > >> > substantial enough to complete our test suite within their timeout. > >> > > >> > >> Haven't the tests been substantially improved since then? > >> > >> Can the tests be segregated into pieces so Travis can still do some > useful > >> work? > >> > > > > >
