I've rolled back to 2017.2.4. Failing builds (e. g. https://teamcity.jetbrains.com/viewLog.html?buildId=2045510&tab=Inspection&buildTypeId=OpenSourceProjects_Druid_InspectionsPullRequests) provide enough information to try to fix the problems and then to try to upgrade to 2018.3.1 again.
Independent of that, the master build is still failing: https://teamcity.jetbrains.com/viewType.html?buildTypeId=OpenSourceProjects_Druid_Inspections&tab=buildTypeHistoryList. One may not pay attention to that as long as PR builds are not failing, but the "TeamCity inspection" badge in Druid's README says "invalid response data". On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 22:54, Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: > Or at least do some spot checks to verify that the TC errors are not > related to the patch in question. > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 5:50 PM Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: > > > That sounds fine to me (ignoring TC for now on other PRs while any new > > issues since the upgrade is fixed separately). If no-one is able to fix > > them quickly I'd suggest rolling back to 2017.2.4, so we don't have a > super > > long period of time where we need to ignore TC. > > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 5:29 PM Jihoon Son <jihoon...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> This blocks all existing PRs from being merged. > >> I don't think this is important enough to block all PRs. > >> What do you think about opening an issue to fix this in one place? > >> In the meantime, we can ignore teamcity inspection result. > >> > >> Jihoon > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 2:58 PM Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >> > Please help fix anything that breaks. Hopefully this also _improves_ > >> things > >> > -- I recall an inspection bug we hit that was fixed in some version > >> later > >> > than 2017.2.4. > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:21 PM Roman Leventov <leven...@apache.org> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > I've updated inspections build step in TeamCity CI to use IntelliJ > >> > 2018.3.1 > >> > > instead of 2017.2.4. The builds are expected to start to fail > because > >> > > IntelliJ has likely refined some existing inspections so that they > >> make > >> > > more findings. > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
