Folks, We should avoid heavy merges if possible. I'm ok with IEP to keep tasks properly, but strictly against all-in-one "+27000,-18200" merges. This task implements Sandbox (API + core) which covered by tests and by some integrations with existing components, which is enough to merge. The most important thing here is that we will be able to speed-up Sandbox coverage development once its core menged to the master.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:41 PM Вячеслав Коптилин <slava.kopti...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Denis, > > In my humble opinion, the security (the sandbox feature is about security, > right?) either covers all APIs/subsystems or not. > Security should work always and everywhere otherwise it is not security :) > > > From my point, we should divide the sandbox and features that use it. > > Also, I added in the main features of Ignite (cache and compute) the > sandbox calls. > And at this point, you mixed both in the same pull-request. > > > I don't see any problem to have the sandbox in the master branch and > implement covering for existing and new features if needed. > On the other hand, this approach leads to ... > ignite-123 [IEP-X] introduces new cool API > ignite-124 [IEP-X] improved cool API > ignite-125 [IEP-X] fixed a bug > ignite-126 [IEP-X] fixed performance drop > ignite-127 [IEP-X] Cache API uses new API > ignite-127 [IEP-X] Compute grid uses new API > ... > > Why should it be a part of the master branch history? All these things can > be done on the feature branch, I think. Anyway, it is up to you. > > Thanks, > S. > > пт, 11 окт. 2019 г. в 16:31, Denis Garus <garus....@gmail.com>: > > > From my point, we should divide the sandbox and features that use it. > > The sandbox is fully implemented and has needed tests. > > > > Also, I added in the main features of Ignite (cache and compute) the > > sandbox calls. > > > > I don't see any problem to have the sandbox in the master branch > > and implement covering for existing and new features if needed. > > > > пт, 11 окт. 2019 г. в 15:21, Вячеслав Коптилин <slava.kopti...@gmail.com > >: > > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > Yep, I understand the scope of the ticket, but... I think it is not a > > good > > > idea to merge partly implemented feature(s) into the master branch. > > > Especially, at this moment. We are at the stage of preparing a new > > release > > > and I doubt that all improvements, tests (unit tests, integration > tests, > > > and performance tests) can be implemented before the release branch is > > cut > > > off. > > > Personally, I would prefer to create an epic/feature branch for these > > > activities. In that case, we can implement a feature step by step and > > merge > > > it into the master branch once all components are covered. > > > > > > > But, sure, we should execute any user-defined code in the sandbox on > a > > > remote node. Feel free to create issues. > > > will do. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > S. > > > > > > пт, 11 окт. 2019 г. в 14:52, Denis Garus <garus....@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > Hello, Slava! > > > > > > > > The scope of the issue is limited by the following features: > > > > > > > > - StreamReceiver for DataStreamer; > > > > - EntryProcessor; > > > > - ComputeJob; > > > > - filter and transformer for ScanQuery. > > > > > > > > But, sure, we should execute any user-defined code in the sandbox on > a > > > > remote node. > > > > Feel free to create issues. > > > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback! > > > > > > > > пт, 11 окт. 2019 г. в 13:26, Вячеслав Коптилин < > > slava.kopti...@gmail.com > > > >: > > > > > > > > > Hello Denis, Anton, > > > > > > > > > > Could you please clarify the following aspect? Do we need the same > > > > > changes/capabilities related to Continuous Queries, Disco > listeners, > > > > > CacheStore Factories etc? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > S. > > > > > > > > > > пт, 11 окт. 2019 г. в 12:24, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > As a prereviewer, I'd like to say that the solution looks good to > > me, > > > > but > > > > > > fresh eyes would be good. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:40 AM Denis Garus <garus....@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Igniters! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've raised the PR [1] with the sandbox for AI [2]. > > > > > > > Could somebody review it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you have questions and prefer the Slack, I've created the > > > channel > > > > > [3]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/6707 > > > > > > > 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11410 > > > > > > > 3. https://app.slack.com/client/T4S1WH2J3/CP8JER880 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
