github have this feature, but these mails are from g...@git.apache.org. I
think some github information are filtered.
https://github.com/blog/811-reply-to-comments-from-email
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Reynold Xin wrote:
> I don't think it does.
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Nan
test
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 3:23 PM, AmplabJenkins wrote:
> Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/559#issuecomment-34518332
>
> All automated tests passed.
> Refer to this link for build results:
> https://amplab.cs
I don't think it does.
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Nan Zhu wrote:
> If we reply these emails, will the reply be posted on pull request
> discussion board automatically?
>
> if yes, that would be very nice
>
> --
> Nan Zhu
>
>
>
> On Friday, February 7, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
Github user CodingCat commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34534298
I am still confused by the previous failure, how can this change interacts
with the streaming recovery mechanism?
actually, even without the above two
Github user CodingCat commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34534153
passed, what I have changed after the previous failure is
1. make LRU scheduling as optional, i.e. the default case is the
"round-robin"
2. r
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34534125
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12627/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34534124
Merged build finished.
If we reply these emails, will the reply be posted on pull request discussion
board automatically?
if yes, that would be very nice
--
Nan Zhu
On Friday, February 7, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> I am with Chris on this one.
>
> These github notifications are similar to JIRA upd
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34533112
Merged build triggered.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34533113
Merged build started.
Github user shivaram commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34532851
Jenkins, retest this please
Github user CodingCat commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34532680
Why this will affect the correctness of test cases in streamingand this
error does not happen at all time...
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34526461
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12626/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34526460
Merged build finished.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34526332
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12625/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34526331
Merged build finished.
I am with Chris on this one.
These github notifications are similar to JIRA updates that in most
ASF projects are sent to dev@ list, and these are valid messages that
contributors in the project should concern about.
Especially the PPMCs (which willl be PMCs hopefully soon) need to know
about the
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34525657
Merged build triggered.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34525659
Merged build started.
Ah okay sounds good. This is what I meant earlier by "You have
some other application that directly calls log4j."... i.e. you have
for historical reasons installed the log4j-over-slf4j.
Would you mind trying out this fix and seeing if it works? This is
designed to be a hotfix for 0.9, not a genera
GitHub user pwendell opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560
[WIP] SPARK-1067: Default log4j initialization causes errors for those not
using log4j
To fix this - we add a check when initializing log4j.
You can merge this pull request into a Git rep
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34525519
Merged build started.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/560#issuecomment-34525518
Merged build triggered.
Github user chrismattmann commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34525458
wait a sec - you guys told Jenkins to test this please and it frickin' did?
Bad ass.
Guys this Github discussion seems like dev discussion in which case it
must be
on dev list and not moved - the whole point of this is that development,
including
conversations related to it, which are the lifeblood of the project should
occur
on the ASF mailing lists.
Refactoring the lists is one
Hi, Patrick --
I forget which other component is responsible, but we're using the
log4j-over-slf4j as part of an overall requirement to centralize logging,
i.e., *someone* else is logging over log4j and we're pulling that in.
(There's also some jul logging from Jersey, etc.)
Goals:
- Fully cont
Sorry for the spam, guys. I’m going to work on getting a separate mailing list,
but we needed to have an initial version of this quickly. Note that you can
filter all these emails as they come from g...@git.apache.org.
Matei
On Feb 7, 2014, at 5:43 PM, Andrew Ash wrote:
> +1 on moving this st
+1 on moving this stuff to a separate mailing list. It's Apache policy
that discussion is archived, but it's not policy that it must be
interleaved with other dev discussion. Let's move it to a
spark-github-discuss list (or a different name) and people who care to see
it can subscribe.
On Fri,
Hey Paul,
So if your goal is ultimately to output to logback. Then why don't you
just use slf4j and logback-classic.jar as described here [1]. Why
involve log4j-over-slf4j at all?
Let's say we refactored the spark build so it didn't advertise
slf4j-log4j12 as a dependency. Would you still be usin
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34524467
One or more automated tests failed
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12624/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34524466
Build finished.
I concur wholeheartedly ...
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Dean Wampler wrote:
> This SPAM is not doing anyone any good. How about another mailing list for
> people who want to see this?
>
> Sent from my rotary phone.
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 2014, at 10:33 AM, mridulm wrote:
> >
> > Github user mri
Hi, Patrick --
That's close but not quite it.
The issue that occurs is not the delegation loop mentioned in slf4j
documentation. The stack overflow is entirely within the code in the Spark
trait:
at org.apache.spark.Logging$class.initializeLogging(Logging.scala:112)
at org.apache.spark.Logging$
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34523596
Build started.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34523595
Build triggered.
Github user shivaram commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34523513
Jenkins, test this please
This SPAM is not doing anyone any good. How about another mailing list for
people who want to see this?
Sent from my rotary phone.
> On Feb 7, 2014, at 10:33 AM, mridulm wrote:
>
> Github user mridulm commented on the pull request:
>
>https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#i
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/559#issuecomment-34518332
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12623/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/559#issuecomment-34518331
Merged build finished.
Paul,
Looking back at your problem. I think it's the one here:
http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#log4jDelegationLoop
So let me just be clear what you are doing so I understand. You have
some other application that directly calls log4j. So you have to
include log4j-over-slf4j to route those logs thr
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/559#issuecomment-34516697
Merged build triggered.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/559#issuecomment-34516699
Merged build started.
GitHub user tdas opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/559
Improved NetworkReceiver in Spark Streaming to allow for a more graceful
StreamingContext shutdown
Current version of StreamingContext.stop() directly killed all the
receivers without waiting
Github user tdas closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/558
GitHub user tdas opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/558
Refactored NetworkReceiver in Spark Streaming to allow for a
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark grace
Will,
Thanks for these thoughts - this is something we should try to be
attentive to in the way we think about versioning.
(2)-(5) are pretty consistent with the guidelines we already follow. I
think the biggest proposed difference is to be conscious of (1), which
at least I had not given much th
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34511511
One or more automated tests failed
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12622/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34511509
Merged build finished.
Github user CodingCat commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34511462
what happened here? Jenkins dead?
got it. that sounds reasonable
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Patrick Wendell wrote:
> Koert - my suggestion was this. We let users use any slf4j backend
> they want. If we detect that they are using the log4j backend and
> *also* they didn't configure any log4j appenders, we set up some nice
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34506820
Merged build started.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34506818
Merged build triggered.
Github user YongFeiWang closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/3
Github user Humbedooh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/557#issuecomment-34501886
One more go! :3
Github user Humbedooh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/557#issuecomment-34500486
Looks like I'll have to add some more fake comments to track this down,
apologies!
All the emails I get from github seem to have the same subject line
"[GitHub] incubator-spark pull request:" and get grouped under the
same thread in gmail -- Is there a way to put the pull request title
in the email subject ?
Thanks
Shivaram
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Matei Zaharia wrote:
Also, it may be intentional but the only PR-level comments seem to get
forwarded. Comments on code are not sent.
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Shivaram Venkataraman <
shiva...@eecs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> All the emails I get from github seem to have the same subject line
> "[GitHub] incubator
Github user Humbedooh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/557#issuecomment-34499399
Testing whether the title of the issue appears in the email subject or not,
please ignore this comment and any more I may or may not have to send to get
this f
As a slf4j user, FWIW, I think this approach is fine. Just note that
you will have to handle log4j classes via reflection if they are not
going to always be on the user classpath.
Is it sufficient to bundle log4j.properties? no programmatic config
mess then. I don't know log4j enough to know if th
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34496898
Merged build finished.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34496900
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12621/
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/548#issuecomment-34496801
Jenkins, test this please
Github user schmit commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34493669
@srowen I have updated and abstracted the evaluation, it should now also
work for the SVM classifier and for other classifiers as well when they get
implemented.
Hi, all
Sometimes, you report an issue, you try to fix by yourself, then you found that
the involved scope of the code base was not understood correctly, or your
description of the issue may not be so complete/accurate
but currently, it seems that the reporter has to comment under the original
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34495304
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12620/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34495302
Build finished.
JIRA I'd guess -- I observed the same thing. Reporters should be able to
edit their own bug!
Sent from my mobile phone
On Feb 7, 2014 11:53 AM, "Henry Saputra" wrote:
> Hi Nan Zhu,
>
> Are you talking about JIRA or Github pull request?
>
> - Henry
>
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Nan Zhu wr
Hi, Henry
It’s JIRA, like
https://spark-project.atlassian.net/browse/SPARK-1060?jql=project%20%3D%20SPARK
Best,
--
Nan Zhu
On Friday, February 7, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> Hi Nan Zhu,
>
> Are you talking about JIRA or Github pull request?
>
> - Henry
>
> On Fri, Fe
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34493700
Merged build triggered.
Hi Nan Zhu,
Are you talking about JIRA or Github pull request?
- Henry
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Nan Zhu wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> Sometimes, you report an issue, you try to fix by yourself, then you found
> that the involved scope of the code base was not understood correctly, or
> your de
Hey Henry,
Let me document this on the wiki. I've already keep pretty thorough
docs on this I just need to migrate them to the wiki. I've created a
JIRA here:
https://spark-project.atlassian.net/browse/SPARK-1066
- Patrick
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
>
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/550#issuecomment-34493701
Merged build started.
Cool, Thanks Patrick! Really appreciate it =)
- Henry
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Patrick Wendell wrote:
> Hey Henry,
>
> Let me document this on the wiki. I've already keep pretty thorough
> docs on this I just need to migrate them to the wiki. I've created a
> JIRA here:
>
> https://spark
Github user pwendell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34492639
@mridulm - we are adding checking for line lengths and some basic checks...
also many IDE's can be configured to enforce style guidelines.
Hi Patrick,
As part of the unofficial checklist for graduation, we need to have a
documented steps to make a release.
As the first and so far the only RE for Apache Spark, I would like to
ask for your help to document the steps to release. This will help
other member to do the release and take tu
Koert - my suggestion was this. We let users use any slf4j backend
they want. If we detect that they are using the log4j backend and
*also* they didn't configure any log4j appenders, we set up some nice
defaults for them. If they are using another backend, Spark doesn't
try to modify the configurat
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34490968
Build started.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34490967
Build triggered.
well "static binding" is probably the wrong terminology but you get the
idea. multiple backends are not allowed and cause an even uglier warning...
see also here:
https://github.com/twitter/scalding/pull/636
and here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/cascading-user/vYvnnN_15ls
all me being
the issue is that slf4j uses static binding. you can put only one slf4j
backend on the classpath, and that's what it uses. more than one is not
allowed.
so you either keep the slf4j-log4j12 dependency for spark, and then you
took away people's choice of slf4j backend which is considered bad form f
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/468#issuecomment-34486470
Merged build finished.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/468#issuecomment-34486471
One or more automated tests failed
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12619/
Github user aarondav commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34486235
PR #557 does indeed add an automatic style checker which includes checking
line lengths.
Github user mridulm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34484468
I am hoping that the PR Prashant Sharma submitted would also include
ability to check these things once committed !
Thanks Kay
On Sat, Feb 8,
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/517#issuecomment-34484190
I don't know of any precommit scripts (I think there's been talk of adding
a general style checker script but AFAIK it hasn't been done yet); I just add
hi
Semantic versioning is great, and I think the proposed extensions for adopting
it in Spark make a lot of sense. However, by focusing strictly on public APIs,
semantic versioning only solves part of the problem (albeit certainly the most
interesting part). I'd like to raise another issue that t
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/468#issuecomment-34483415
Merged build triggered.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/468#issuecomment-34483416
Merged build started.
This also seems relevant - but not my area of expertise (whether this
is a valid way to check this).
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10505418/how-to-find-which-library-slf4j-has-bound-itself-to
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Patrick Wendell wrote:
> Hey Guys,
>
> Thanks for explainning. Ya
Hey Guys,
Thanks for explainning. Ya this is a problem - we didn't really know
that people are using other slf4j backends, slf4j is in there for
historical reasons but I think we may assume in a few places that
log4j is being used and we should minimize those.
We should patch this and get a fix i
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/543#issuecomment-34478004
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12618/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/543#issuecomment-34478001
Merged build finished.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/551#issuecomment-34477732
Merged build finished.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/551#issuecomment-34477734
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12617/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/543#issuecomment-34473028
Merged build started.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/551#issuecomment-34473020
Merged build started.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/551#issuecomment-34473018
Merged build triggered.
FYI, it looks like JIRA notifications are still not quite being forwarded, but
GitHub ones now are, including comments. (Thanks to Jake Ferrel for setting
this up!). If you need to filter out the GitHub ones, they all come from
g...@git.apache.org.
This list is about to get a lot busier… When w
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/543#issuecomment-34473027
Merged build triggered.
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/543#issuecomment-34472787
Jenkins, this is ok to test
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
