That's more or less why I didn't flesh out testing. Might be worth spinning up full dev and the site-book to smoke test, but the branch should be in a good state. I figured if we get a couple +1's on the PR, it's essentially voting anyway, but this is pretty new in terms of process.
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:53 PM Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > If all the PR’s are on master->feature branch. Why do we need testing? > this is almost a vote situation. > > > > > On June 22, 2018 at 12:01:11, Justin Leet (justinjl...@gmail.com) wrote: > > The (formerly) active PRs are now merged in and closed. > > We don't seem to have defined way to merge a feature branch into master > (unless I missed it), so I went ahead and opened a PR against the parent > ticket. Please see #1076 <https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1076>. > > I haven't fleshed out testing and so on for the PR description, although > if > we'd like it compiled from the various child PRs against the branch, I can > certainly do so. > > Justin > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:46 PM Michael Miklavcic < > michael.miklav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 let's do it. > > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 2:01 PM Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> wrote: > > > > > +1 I think we should merge ASAP and kill the feature branch. I think > the > > > work has well surpassed the level required to get it into master. > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Justin Leet <justinjl...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > The Solr branch (/feature/METRON-1416-upgrade-solr > > > > < > > https://github.com/apache/metron/tree/feature/METRON-1416-upgrade-solr > > > >), > > > > has been progressing for a while now. I'd like to open up discussion > > > > around what it takes to get it into master. > > > > > > > > The JIRA for tracking this feature branch is METRON-1416 > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1416>. > > > > > > > > As shown in the JIRA, the majority of tasks are complete, with a few > > > > outstanding issues. Of these, I believe these are the main ones of > > > interest > > > > to this discussion. > > > > > > > > - METRON-1629 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1629> - > > > > There is an active PR #1072 < > > > https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1072 > > > > > > > > > - METRON-1609 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1609> - > > > > There is an active PR #1056 < > > > https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1056 > > > > > > > > > - METRON-1602 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1602> - > > > > Full > > > > dev can run with Solr without this, it would simply be more > > > convenient. > > > > - METRON-1632 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1632> - > > > > Causes a metaalert specific issue where UI filtering on > > > > source.type:metaalert fails. More detail is on the Jira. > > > > - Two validation tickets. It's been run up on multinode, and manual > > > > testing has happened (and I'm will be seen a bit more on the final > > PR > > > by > > > > various reviewers), so I'm inclined to just leave these open until > > > we're > > > > good to go. Let me know if we want to handle this differently. > > > > > > > > I'm of the opinion both of the active PRs need to be merged before > we > > > merge > > > > this into master, especially the documentation one. The other two > > > tickets > > > > can be done in the future; one can be worked around and one is a > > > metaalert > > > > specific issue that primarily effects the alerts UI. > > > > > > > > As the branch has grown and diverged from master, it's gotten > > > increasingly > > > > unwieldy to maintain (and I think it's worth a follow-on discussion > > about > > > > how we manage refactorings that happen in these sorts of branches). > I > > > know > > > > there's been at least a couple merges from master that have been > > > > nontrivially difficult and required careful testing, particularly > > around > > > > the DAO layer, to avoid regressions in both code and tests. > > > > > > > > The feature set is pretty complete. The UI works, barring the > > metaalert > > > > issue. Much of the backend has been refactored and seen improved > test > > > > coverage benefiting both Solr and Elasticsearch. The main difference > > > > between ES and Solr is the lack of the equivalent visualizations to > > > > Kibana. I don't believe the feature branch needs to wait for this, > as > > > it's > > > > pretty standalone work that can be added as usage and demand > dictates. > > > > > > > > I'm of the opinion that the benefits of getting the branch into > master > > > > outweighs the issues still present, especially in terms of making > > > > refactoring and features available and easing the dev burden. The > > > > remaining tickets are Solr specific, and ES functions as it does in > > > master. > > > > > > > > Are there any must-haves before we bring this branch back? Are there > > any > > > > other concerns we have before a final PR is opened (pending > completion > > of > > > > active PRs and any other must-haves)? > > > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > > > >
