Why wouldn't these folks already be pissed that their pull request is lost in a
sea of 115 of them the stretches back years?
Let me ask another question as it sounds like you believe that the burden is on
the committers to get these processed.
If that's the case, do the committers have the tools
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3873?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371617#comment-15371617
]
Jens Geyer commented on THRIFT-3873:
Ok, I do that.
> Is there a way to rebuild one
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3876?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371599#comment-15371599
]
Jens Geyer commented on THRIFT-3876:
Cool!
I am going to look at it in the next days
Hi Jim,
Anything older than a couple months should probably be declined outright
and the author may resubmit it.
It sounds like a good idea, but honestly, I don't believe it is.
In the past months I did a lot of promoting on SO, especially mentioning and
highlighting the fact that we accept
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3228?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
James E. King, III updated THRIFT-3228:
---
Priority: Major (was: Critical)
> Fix TAutoOverlapThread may reference released memo
All the pull requests that I have outstanding are not critical, so if you
decide to package up 0.10.0 based on master today it will have everything in it
that I feel needed to be fixed in the C++ library. As such I changed the last
two critical severity issues to major in the C++ backlog, and t
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3238?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
James E. King, III updated THRIFT-3238:
---
Priority: Major (was: Critical)
> Fix TNamedPipeServer can be interrupted by faulty
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Aki Sukegawa wrote:
> Jim, most of them are submitted after initial planned date of 0.10.0
> release that is January.
> I believe it is more important to proceed with the next release right now.
> That said, I agree we need to work through pull requests.
> I've w
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3610?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371102#comment-15371102
]
Aki Sukegawa commented on THRIFT-3610:
--
[~jking3] thanks, I didn't want to push them
Jim, most of them are submitted after initial planned date of 0.10.0
release that is January.
I believe it is more important to proceed with the next release right now.
That said, I agree we need to work through pull requests.
I've written while ago a small tool to list all pull requests which have
I'm excited to see progress towards a sane state for contributors to pile
on, but, in addition to Jim's point, I have a few concerns:
+ Which build is the pre-commit? The master CI looks ~75% red:
https://travis-ci.org/apache/thrift/builds - still dauntingly red for a new
contributor imo.
+ Is the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3602?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371033#comment-15371033
]
James E. King, III commented on THRIFT-3602:
The pull request is still open o
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3610?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371039#comment-15371039
]
James E. King, III commented on THRIFT-3610:
This needs to be rebased and res
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3600?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371031#comment-15371031
]
James E. King, III commented on THRIFT-3600:
The pull request is still open o
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3476?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371024#comment-15371024
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on THRIFT-3476:
Github user jeking3 commented on the iss
Github user jeking3 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/thrift/pull/1032
Waiting for master to rev so I can rebase and kick this build again.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project d
I suggested to Jake in an email that we should drain the pull request list
before we do this. There are 110+ open pull requests on github. That size
backlog is not healthy. Anything recent that can be rebased and merged should
be included. Anything older than a couple months should probably
Github user caty commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/thrift/pull/1011
I only change php code, why the Travis CI build failed?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have thi
+1 !
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016, 17:07 Jens Geyer wrote:
> +1
>
> Von: Jake Farrell
> Gesendet: 11.07.2016 04:02
> An: dev@thrift.apache.org
> Betreff: 0.10.0
>
> With the builds now solely on travis and the pre-commit green again what
> are peoples thoughts on cutting
+1
Von: Jake Farrell
Gesendet: 11.07.2016 04:02
An: dev@thrift.apache.org
Betreff: 0.10.0
With the builds now solely on travis and the pre-commit green again what
are peoples thoughts on cutting 0.10.0, any objections?
-Jake
+1
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 7:02 PM, Jake Farrell wrote:
> With the builds now solely on travis and the pre-commit green again what
> are peoples thoughts on cutting 0.10.0, any objections?
>
> -Jake
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
