Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On 30/06/2019 10.10, Holger Freyther wrote: > On 28. Jun 2019, at 00:57, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> In this particular case, Google loves to use Bazel. Everyone else hates that >> they do. >> >> Ask anyone trying to package Tensorflow. > > Some Ex-Googlers like it too. It seems there is a disconnect between > the SaaS/PaaS/CD world and where some of us come from with traditional > packaging of binaries. :} Indeed. Having been exposed to it once, I can understand where a closed-source company could find Bazel attractive, but it was a *horrible* fit for open source projects at the time. I don't know how much it has improved, though, given Google, I would suspect "not much". -- Matthew ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On fredag 28. juni 2019 17:29:29 CEST Mutz, Marc wrote: >> I don't know whether there's a plugin for that, but a feature that >> would really benefit a lot of Qt devs would be if Gerrit would >> understand whether the Merge Conflict is due to a prerequisite commit >> not having been merged, yet, or whether there's really a conflicting >> commit merged. ... and, in the latter case, whether it's a conflicting commit that's been integrated already or merely one that's in the current staging branch ahead of the one we're trying to stage. >> It kind of knows already, since it shows which other >> commits conflict with the current one, if any, but it still shows >> Merge Conflict for missing prerequisite commits. It would be totally >> cool if instead of Merge Conflict, it would show Prerequisite Missing >> (e.g.). >> >> And then, going into dream mode, if one could add a prerequisite >> manually, across modules, so that a, say, qtdeclarative change could >> track a qtbase one and show Prerequisite Missing until the qtbase >> commit has been merged _and integrated_ in qt5. >> >> Don't know how hard this would be to implement, or if it's possible >> at all. Likewise dreaming: actually tell me which commit I'm conflicting with ! Frederik Gladhorn (1 July 2019 16:28) replied: > I agree that merge commits are confusing. In general I'd say the > dependency tracking is not always super clear in the new UI. Indeed. > The merge conflict detection is part of Gerrit core, there are no > plugins that go so deep as far as I know. Improving that should > clearly be done upstream, in Gerrit core. > > If anyone wants to contribute, this kind of improvement should be > welcome. Eddy. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
Am 01.07.2019 um 19:57 schrieb André Pönitz: > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 02:43:43PM +, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: and I'll give Gravatar a spin: https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravata r >> >> It's there, enjoy and put your avatar up at https://gravatar.com . > > I know it's a bit late and it won't change anything anyway. > > Still: Was there an explanation of the benefits of using gravatar somewhere, > also perhaps in the light of discussions like > > https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4553/can-we-use-non-gravatar-avatars/5658#5658 This is an important question I think and I'd like to get an answer to it, too. Cheers, Robert ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On 2.7.2019 15.13, Kari Oikarinen wrote: > > On 2.7.2019 14.59, Cristian Adam wrote: >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Development On Behalf Of >>> Frederik Gladhorn >>> Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2019 16:11 >>> To: Qt Project Development Mailing-List >>> Subject: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9 >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Just to keep the ball rolling, we prepared the upgrade to move from Gerrit >>> 2.16.7 to 2.16.9. I don't expect any real changes, but it's a good exercise >>> for us >>> to stay up to date and see if the scripting of the upgrade works. >>> The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version >>> seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). >>> >>> So far it seems to work nicely for me, running the script which stops >>> gerrit, >>> pushes the new release and restarts it takes around two minutes, so there >>> won't be any significant downtime this time around. >>> >>> Assuming there are no big concerns I'll just do the upgrade tomorrow, on the >>> test instance it works without problems. >>> >>> On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new >>> Gerrit, >>> I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add >>> reviewers based on git blame https://gerrit- >>> review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame >>> and I'll give Gravatar a spin: >>> https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars- >>> gravatar >>> >>> We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments >>> appreciated. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Frederik >>> >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm getting from Qt Sanity Bot for >> https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt-creator/qt-creator/+/266791 >> >> The following reply every 5 minutes: >> >> Worker 'sanity' produced an unreasonable amount of output. You should >> ask the bot maintainers for advice. >> >> The current behavior is a bit loopy, can we do something about it? > > I guess you've managed to get sanity into a situation where it doesn't give a > sanity score at all. > > Then once the bot looks at the commits it hasn't scored yet, it will repeat > that > again and again. This isn't actually sufficient to cause the issue, the bot remembers what commits it has looked at during current run and doesn't look at them again. So the new attempts only happen when sanity bot is started again and it looks at all open changes it hasn't reviewed yet. But looks like for some reason sanity bot's connection (with which it receives notifications about new patchsets) drops every 5 minutes and causes the bot to quit. When it is automatically restarted, it then tries to review again because of missing review. I manually put a negative review in place, so at least the spam should be over for this specific commit for now. > Could you run sanity bot locally and see what is happening to it? There is a > git > hook in qtrepotools to do it when you commit. > -- Kari ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On 2.7.2019 14.59, Cristian Adam wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Development On Behalf Of >> Frederik Gladhorn >> Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2019 16:11 >> To: Qt Project Development Mailing-List >> Subject: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9 >> >> Hi, >> >> Just to keep the ball rolling, we prepared the upgrade to move from Gerrit >> 2.16.7 to 2.16.9. I don't expect any real changes, but it's a good exercise >> for us >> to stay up to date and see if the scripting of the upgrade works. >> The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version >> seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). >> >> So far it seems to work nicely for me, running the script which stops gerrit, >> pushes the new release and restarts it takes around two minutes, so there >> won't be any significant downtime this time around. >> >> Assuming there are no big concerns I'll just do the upgrade tomorrow, on the >> test instance it works without problems. >> >> On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new Gerrit, >> I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add >> reviewers based on git blame https://gerrit- >> review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame >> and I'll give Gravatar a spin: >> https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars- >> gravatar >> >> We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments >> appreciated. >> >> Cheers, >> Frederik >> > > Hi, > > I'm getting from Qt Sanity Bot for > https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt-creator/qt-creator/+/266791 > > The following reply every 5 minutes: > > Worker 'sanity' produced an unreasonable amount of output. You should > ask the bot maintainers for advice. > > The current behavior is a bit loopy, can we do something about it? I guess you've managed to get sanity into a situation where it doesn't give a sanity score at all. Then once the bot looks at the commits it hasn't scored yet, it will repeat that again and again. Could you run sanity bot locally and see what is happening to it? There is a git hook in qtrepotools to do it when you commit. -- Kari ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
> -Original Message- > From: Development On Behalf Of > Frederik Gladhorn > Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2019 16:11 > To: Qt Project Development Mailing-List > Subject: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9 > > Hi, > > Just to keep the ball rolling, we prepared the upgrade to move from Gerrit > 2.16.7 to 2.16.9. I don't expect any real changes, but it's a good exercise > for us > to stay up to date and see if the scripting of the upgrade works. > The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version > seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). > > So far it seems to work nicely for me, running the script which stops gerrit, > pushes the new release and restarts it takes around two minutes, so there > won't be any significant downtime this time around. > > Assuming there are no big concerns I'll just do the upgrade tomorrow, on the > test instance it works without problems. > > On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new Gerrit, > I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add > reviewers based on git blame https://gerrit- > review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame > and I'll give Gravatar a spin: > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars- > gravatar > > We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments > appreciated. > > Cheers, > Frederik > Hi, I'm getting from Qt Sanity Bot for https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt-creator/qt-creator/+/266791 The following reply every 5 minutes: Worker 'sanity' produced an unreasonable amount of output. You should ask the bot maintainers for advice. The current behavior is a bit loopy, can we do something about it? Cheers, Cristian. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On mandag 1. juli 2019 21:23:35 CEST André Hartmann wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm not sure if it's related to the gravatars, but Gerrit became > horrible slow here (this is on a 2MBit DSL line). It's almost unuseable. > > Has someone else experienced the same? Yes, it slowed to a crawl yesterday, we're trying to find out why, even though that's always a bit tricky post mortem. We do have some records of the resource usage and the logs, but the logs seem rather innocent from what I could tell yesterday. Cheers, Frederik > > Regards, > André > > Am 01.07.19 um 19:57 schrieb André Pönitz: > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 02:43:43PM +, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > and I'll give Gravatar a spin: > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-grav > ata > r > >> > >> It's there, enjoy and put your avatar up at https://gravatar.com . > > > > I know it's a bit late and it won't change anything anyway. > > > > Still: Was there an explanation of the benefits of using gravatar > > somewhere, also perhaps in the light of discussions like > > > > https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4553/can-we-use-non-gravatar-avat > > ars/5658#5658 > > > > ? > > > > Andre' > > ___ > > Development mailing list > > Development@qt-project.org > > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
Hi all, I'm not sure if it's related to the gravatars, but Gerrit became horrible slow here (this is on a 2MBit DSL line). It's almost unuseable. Has someone else experienced the same? Regards, André Am 01.07.19 um 19:57 schrieb André Pönitz: On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 02:43:43PM +, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: and I'll give Gravatar a spin: https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravata r It's there, enjoy and put your avatar up at https://gravatar.com . I know it's a bit late and it won't change anything anyway. Still: Was there an explanation of the benefits of using gravatar somewhere, also perhaps in the light of discussions like https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4553/can-we-use-non-gravatar-avatars/5658#5658 ? Andre' ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 02:43:43PM +, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > > > and I'll give Gravatar a spin: > > > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravata > > > r > > It's there, enjoy and put your avatar up at https://gravatar.com . I know it's a bit late and it won't change anything anyway. Still: Was there an explanation of the benefits of using gravatar somewhere, also perhaps in the light of discussions like https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4553/can-we-use-non-gravatar-avatars/5658#5658 ? Andre' ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
And we're on 2.16.9, which brings no huge improvements as far as I can tell. But it's great to gather some experience and more and more automate the deployment of new versions. Enjoy! On torsdag 27. juni 2019 16:53:26 CEST Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: > > On 27 Jun 2019, at 16:10, Frederik Gladhorn > > wrote: > > > > On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new > > Gerrit, I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to > > add reviewers based on git blame > > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-bl > > ame > YES Hum, I didn't manage to get this one to do anything in our test instance, so it's skipped for now, I hope we'll find a way to get it to work and maybe start using it. I personally hope it would be a good addition, but would propose a test period, if there are many people complaining, we could just get rid of it again. Anyhow, this pends figuring out how to get it to work. > > > and I'll give Gravatar a spin: > > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravata > > r It's there, enjoy and put your avatar up at https://gravatar.com . > > YES > > > We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments > > appreciated. > > YES, the core webhook one Done, we have the webhooks installed now, just not configured in any way yet. Cheers, Frederik > > Tor Arne ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On fredag 28. juni 2019 17:29:29 CEST Mutz, Marc wrote: > On 2019-06-27 16:10, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > [...] > > > On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new > > Gerrit, > > I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add > > reviewers > > based on git blame > > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-bl > > ame and I'll give Gravatar a spin: > > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravata > > r > > > > We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments > > appreciated. > > I don't know whether there's a plugin for that, but a feature that would > really benefit a lot of Qt devs would be if Gerrit would understand > whether the Merge Conflict is due to a prerequisite commit not having > been merged, yet, or whether there's really a conflicting commit merged. > It kind of knows already, since it shows which other commits conflict > with the current one, if any, but it still shows Merge Conflict for > missing prerequisite commits. It would be totally cool if instead of > Merge Conflict, it would show Prerequisite Missing (e.g.). > > And then, going into dream mode, if one could add a prerequisite > manually, across modules, so that a, say, qtdeclarative change could > track a qtbase one and show Prerequisite Missing until the qtbase commit > has been merged _and integrated_ in qt5. > > Don't know how hard this would be to implement, or if it's possible at > all. I agree that merge commits are confusing. In general I'd say the dependency tracking is not always super clear in the new UI. The merge conflict detection is part of Gerrit core, there are no plugins that go so deep as far as I know. Improving that should clearly be done upstream, in Gerrit core. If anyone wants to contribute, this kind of improvement should be welcome. Cheers, Frederik > > Thanks, > Marc ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
> On 28. Jun 2019, at 00:57, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On Thursday, 27 June 2019 08:24:40 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >> 27.06.2019, 18:12, "Thiago Macieira" : >>> On Thursday, 27 June 2019 07:10:36 PDT Frederik Gladhorn wrote: The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). >>> >>> Argument against home-cooked, not-widely-used build systems right here. >> >> This argument is more about imprecise build instructions than that. > > In this particular case, Google loves to use Bazel. Everyone else hates that > they do. > > Ask anyone trying to package Tensorflow. Some Ex-Googlers like it too. It seems there is a disconnect between the SaaS/PaaS/CD world and where some of us come from with traditional packaging of binaries. :} ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On 2019-06-27 16:10, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: [...] On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new Gerrit, I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add reviewers based on git blame https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame and I'll give Gravatar a spin: https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravatar We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments appreciated. I don't know whether there's a plugin for that, but a feature that would really benefit a lot of Qt devs would be if Gerrit would understand whether the Merge Conflict is due to a prerequisite commit not having been merged, yet, or whether there's really a conflicting commit merged. It kind of knows already, since it shows which other commits conflict with the current one, if any, but it still shows Merge Conflict for missing prerequisite commits. It would be totally cool if instead of Merge Conflict, it would show Prerequisite Missing (e.g.). And then, going into dream mode, if one could add a prerequisite manually, across modules, so that a, say, qtdeclarative change could track a qtbase one and show Prerequisite Missing until the qtbase commit has been merged _and integrated_ in qt5. Don't know how hard this would be to implement, or if it's possible at all. Thanks, Marc ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On 27.6.2019 17.53, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: > > >> On 27 Jun 2019, at 16:10, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: >> >> On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new Gerrit, >> I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add reviewers >> based on git blame >> https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame > > YES While this sounds good in principle, I'm a little apprehensive about the details. The plugin adds reviewers on new patchsets. I think that means that if it adds someone that doesn't actually want to do the review and they delete themselves, any new patchset is likely to add them again. I think it might not also recognize WIP status (although it can be configured to ignore changes with a certain regex in subject). If it were a button to add automatically suggested reviewers, I'd be in favor. But I think this particular plugin might be too aggressive. For example Ossi is likely to be added to quite a few commits touching qmake... > >> and I'll give Gravatar a spin: >> https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravatar > > YES > >> >> We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments appreciated. > > YES, the core webhook one -- Kari ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On Thursday, 27 June 2019 08:24:40 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > 27.06.2019, 18:12, "Thiago Macieira" : > > On Thursday, 27 June 2019 07:10:36 PDT Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > >> The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version > >> seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). > > > > Argument against home-cooked, not-widely-used build systems right here. > > This argument is more about imprecise build instructions than that. In this particular case, Google loves to use Bazel. Everyone else hates that they do. Ask anyone trying to package Tensorflow. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel System Software Products ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
That’s good news! Thanks for making the upgrades :) Simon > On 27. Jun 2019, at 16:15, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > > Hi, > > Just to keep the ball rolling, we prepared the upgrade to move from Gerrit > 2.16.7 to 2.16.9. I don't expect any real changes, but it's a good exercise > for us to stay up to date and see if the scripting of the upgrade works. > The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version seems > to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). > > So far it seems to work nicely for me, running the script which stops gerrit, > pushes the new release and restarts it takes around two minutes, so there > won't be any significant downtime this time around. > > Assuming there are no big concerns I'll just do the upgrade tomorrow, on the > test instance it works without problems. > > On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new Gerrit, > I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add reviewers > based on git blame > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame > and I'll give Gravatar a spin: > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravatar > > We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments appreciated. > > Cheers, > Frederik > > > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
27.06.2019, 18:12, "Thiago Macieira" : > On Thursday, 27 June 2019 07:10:36 PDT Frederik Gladhorn wrote: >> The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version >> seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). > > Argument against home-cooked, not-widely-used build systems right here. This argument is more about imprecise build instructions than that. -- Regards, Konstantin ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
On Thursday, 27 June 2019 07:10:36 PDT Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version > seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). Argument against home-cooked, not-widely-used build systems right here. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel System Software Products ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
> On 27 Jun 2019, at 16:10, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > > On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new Gerrit, > I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add reviewers > based on git blame > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame YES > and I'll give Gravatar a spin: > https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravatar YES > > We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments appreciated. YES, the core webhook one Tor Arne ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
[Development] Moving to Gerrit 2.16.9
Hi, Just to keep the ball rolling, we prepared the upgrade to move from Gerrit 2.16.7 to 2.16.9. I don't expect any real changes, but it's a good exercise for us to stay up to date and see if the scripting of the upgrade works. The only real challenge was upgrading Bazel, since every Gerrit version seems to only compile with one exact Bazel version (roughly). So far it seems to work nicely for me, running the script which stops gerrit, pushes the new release and restarts it takes around two minutes, so there won't be any significant downtime this time around. Assuming there are no big concerns I'll just do the upgrade tomorrow, on the test instance it works without problems. On a related note, now that things are generally working with the new Gerrit, I was wondering if we want to consider plugins. There is one to add reviewers based on git blame https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/reviewers-by-blame and I'll give Gravatar a spin: https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/admin/repos/plugins/avatars-gravatar We should also consider the various webhooks plugins. Comments appreciated. Cheers, Frederik ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
