Konstantine, you have voted -1, and stated some requirements before you'll withdraw that -1. As I plan to do work to fulfill those requirements, I want to make sure that what I'm proposing will, in fact, satisfy you. That's why I'm asking, if we implement full "test-patch" integration for Windows, does it seem to you that that would provide adequate support?
I have learned not to presume that my interpretation is correct. My interpretation of item #1 is that test-patch provides pre-commit build, so it would satisfy item #1. But rather than assuming that I am interpreting it correctly, I simply want your agreement that it would, or if not, clarification why it won't. Regarding item #2, it is also my interpretation that test-patch provides an on-demand (perhaps 20-minutes deferred) Jenkins build and unit test, with logs available to the developer, so it would satisfy item #2. But rather than assuming that I am interpreting it correctly, I simply want your agreement that it would, or if not, clarification why it won't. In agile terms, you are the Owner of these requirements. Please give me owner feedback as to whether my proposed work sounds like it will satisfy the requirements. Thank you, --Matt On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com>wrote: > Didn't I explain in details what I am asking for? > > Thanks, > --Konst > > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Matt Foley <mfo...@hortonworks.com> > wrote: > > Hi Konstantin, > > I'd like to point out two things: > > First, I already committed in this thread (email of Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at > > 6:01 PM) to providing CI for Windows builds. So please stop acting like > I'm > > resisting this idea or something. > > Second, you didn't answer my question, you just kvetched about the > phrasing. > > So I ask again: > > > > Will providing full "test-patch" integration (pre-commit build and unit > test > > triggered by Jira "Patch Available" state) satisfy your request for > > functionality #1 and #2? Yes or no, please. > > > > Thanks, > > --Matt > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Konstantin Shvachko < > shv.had...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Matt, > >> > >> On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Matt Foley <mfo...@hortonworks.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Konstantin, > >> > I would like to explore what it would take to remove this perceived > >> > impediment -- > >> > >> Glad you decided to explore. Thank you. > >> > >> > although I reserve the right to argue that this is not > >> > pre-requisite to merging the cross-platform support patch. > >> > >> It's your right indeed. So as mine to question what the platform > >> support means for you, which I believe remained unclear. > >> I do not impede the change as you should have noticed. My requirement > >> comes from my perception of the support, which means to me exactly two > >> things: > >> 1. The ability to recognise the code is broken for the platform > >> 2. The ability to test new patches on the platform > >> The latter is problematic, as many noticed in this thread, for those > >> whose customary environment does not include Windows. > >> > >> > If we implemented full "test-patch" support for Windows on trunk, > would > >> > that > >> > fulfill both your items #1 and #2? Please note that: > >> > a) Pushing the "Patch Available" button in Jira shall cause a > pre-commit > >> > build to start within, I believe, 20 minutes. > >> > b) That build keeps logs for both java build and unit tests for > several > >> > days, that are accessible to all viewers. > >> > >> In item #1 I mostly asking for the nightly build, which is simpler > >> than "test-patch". The latter would be ideal from the platform support > >> viewpoint, but it is for the community to decide if we want to add > >> extra +3 hours to the build. > >> Nightly build in my understanding is triggered by the timer rather > >> than by Jira's "submit patch" button. On Jenkins build configuration > >> you can specify it under "Build periodically". > >> > >> > So, does this provide sufficient on-demand support that we don't have > to > >> > implement a whole new on-demand VM support structure of some sort for > #2 > >> > (which would be an extraordinary and impractical demand)? > >> > >> I did not mention VMs. Item #2 means a build, which runs "test-patch" > >> target with the file specified by a user (instead of a jira > >> attachment). > >> When user clicks "Build Now" link a box is displayed where the user > >> can enter the file path containing the patch. This can be specified in > >> the Build Configuration under "This build is parameterized" by > >> choosing AddParameter / FileParameter. The build can run on the same > >> Windows machine as the nightly build. > >> Such build will let people test their patches for Windows on Jenkins > >> if they don't posses a license for the right version of Windows. > >> I hope this will not turn into extraordinary or impractical effort. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> --Konst > >> > >> > Thanks, > >> > --Matt > >> > > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Konstantin Shvachko > >> > <shv.had...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> -1 > >> >> We should have a CI infrastructure in place before we can commit to > >> >> supporting Windows platform. > >> >> > >> >> Eric is right Win/Cygwin was supported since day one. > >> >> I had a Windows box under my desk running nightly builds back in > >> >> 2006-07. > >> >> People were irritated but I was filing windows bugs until 0.22 > release. > >> >> Times changing and I am glad to see wider support for Win platform. > >> >> > >> >> But in order to make it work you guys need to put the CI process in > >> >> place > >> >> > >> >> 1. windows jenkins build: could be nightly or PreCommit. > >> >> - Nightly would mean that changes can be committed to trunk based on > >> >> linux PreCommit build. And people will file bugs if the change broke > >> >> Windows nightly build. > >> >> - PreCommit-win build will mean automatic reporting failed tests to > >> >> respective jira blocking commits the same way as it is now with linux > >> >> PreCommit builds. > >> >> We should discuss which way is more efficient for developers. > >> >> > >> >> 2. On-demand-windows Jenkins build. > >> >> I see it as a build to which I can attach my patch and the build will > >> >> run my changes on a dedicated windows box. > >> >> That way people can test their changes without having personal > windows > >> >> nodes. > >> >> > >> >> I think this is the minimal set of requirement for us to be able to > >> >> commit to the new platform. > >> >> Right now I see only one windows related build > >> >> https://builds.apache.org/view/Hadoop/job/Hadoop-1-win/ > >> >> Which was failing since Sept 8, 2012 and did not run in the last > month. > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, > >> >> --Konst > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Eric Baldeschwieler > >> >> <eri...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > >> >> > +1 (non-binding) > >> >> > > >> >> > A few of observations: > >> >> > > >> >> > - Windows has actually been a supported platform for Hadoop since > 0.1 > >> >> > . > >> >> > Doug championed supporting windows then and we've continued to do > it > >> >> > with > >> >> > varying vigor over time. To my knowledge we've never made a > decision > >> >> > to > >> >> > drop windows support. The change here is improving our support and > >> >> > dropping > >> >> > the requirement of cigwin. We had Nutch windows users on the list > in > >> >> > 2006 > >> >> > and we've been supporting windows FS requirements since inception. > >> >> > > >> >> > - A little pragmatism will go a long way. As a community we've got > >> >> > to > >> >> > stay committed to keeping hadoop simple (so it does work on many > >> >> > platforms) > >> >> > and extending it to take advantage of key emerging OS/hardware > >> >> > features, > >> >> > such as containers, new FSs, virtualization, flash ... We should > all > >> >> > plan > >> >> > to let new features & optimizations emerge that don't work > >> >> > everywhere, if > >> >> > they are compelling and central to hadoop's mission of being THE > best > >> >> > fabric > >> >> > for storing and processing big data. > >> >> > > >> >> > - A UI project like KDE has to deal with the MANY differences > between > >> >> > windows and linux UI APIs. Hadoop faces no such complex challenge > >> >> > and hence > >> >> > can be maintained from a single codeline IMO. It is mostly > >> >> > abstracted from > >> >> > the OS APIs via Java and our design choices. Where it is not we > can > >> >> > continue to add plugable abstractions. > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
