<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
One of these patchsets was mine, so I feel qualified to send a
response :)<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/04/2016 12:06 PM, Armando M.
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK+RQeYzR97fOk8vhi+hnXPHki0HPyn3DVOkx-H=srX6pyNchg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 4 April 2016 at 09:51, Ihar
Hrachyshka <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ihrachys@redhat.com" target="_blank">ihrachys@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class="">Doug Wiegley <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:dougwig@parksidesoftware.com"
target="_blank">dougwig@parksidesoftware.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">On
Apr 4, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ihrachys@redhat.com" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ihrachys@redhat.com">ihrachys@redhat.com</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
Armando M. <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:armamig@gmail.com" target="_blank">armamig@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">On
4 April 2016 at 09:01, Ihar Hrachyshka <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ihrachys@redhat.com"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ihrachys@redhat.com">ihrachys@redhat.com</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
Hi all,<br>
<br>
I noticed that often times we go and -2 all the
patches in the review queue on every neutron
specific gate breakage spotted. This is allegedly
done to make sure that nothing known to be broken
land in merge gate until we fix the breakage on
our side.<br>
<br>
This is not allegedly done. When I do it, I put a
comment next to my action.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
While I share the goal of not resetting the gate
if we can avoid it, I find the way we do it a bit
too aggressive. Especially considering that often
times those -2 votes sit there not cleared even
days after the causing breakage is fixed,
needlessly blocking patches landing.<br>
<br>
That's a blatant lie: I am aggressive at putting
-2s as well as removing them. Other changes for
those the -2 stick is probably because they aren't
worth the hassle. We've been also in feature
freeze so slowing things down should have hurt
anyway.<br>
<br>
<br>
I suggest we either make sure that we remove those
-2 votes right after gate fixes land, or we use
other means to communicate to core reviewers that
there is a time window when nothing should land in
the merge queue.<br>
<br>
Initially I tried sending emails ahead of time
alerting for gate breakages, but that doesn't work
for obvious reasons: there is a lag that can still
be fatal.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</span></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Emails don't work. Or work just occasionally.<br>
Openstack Dev mailing list is pretty crowded, so sometimes to read
everything, takes hours. In this situation, important message can be
easily skipped.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK+RQeYzR97fOk8vhi+hnXPHki0HPyn3DVOkx-H=srX6pyNchg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
On the specific circumstance, gate broke on Friday
late afternoon PDT. It didn't seem that was
anything critical worth merging at all cost that
couldn't wait until Monday morning and I didn't
bother check that things merged safely in the
middle of my weekend.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yeah, but it’s already up to two working days in
some places.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Not that -2’s sitting around is good, but what is so
urgent that two days affects the overall flow of
things, and didn’t get escalated? Review chains can
address collaboration issues. Monster syntax churns
with lots of conflicts get more annoying, but they’re
annoying for everyone anyway. The worst part of two
days with a -2 is the fact that no one will look at it
and give feedback during that time period, IMO, not
that it takes longer to merge. Velocity is about
throughput, not latency.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span>
It is definitely not the end of the world. The process of
-2 cancellation is just non-transparent, and I am not sure
whether I need to reach the vote owner to remove it, or it
will just magically vanish. I had inconsistent experiences
with freezing -2’s in OpenStack.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If the vote doesn't magically vanish when you expect
to, you can simply reach out the person. When has that
become a problem, especially when that person is usually
available on irc and generally very responsive?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>The -2 keeps you on your toes and aware of the state
of the gate, which to me is a good thing :)</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I'll shortly describe the situation.<br>
My patchset got approved. It had +W and gate pre-approved it, but
failed on final merge. So at the end landed as +2, +W and -2 from
gate.<br>
<br>
I didn't know what happened until I've seen Armando's "-2" with
explanation. Even though I'm trying to be proactive on IRC channel
about possible gate problems.<br>
<br>
So it's definitely good method to "be aware". But, in the same time
it was very strange to me. I had everything prepared to be merged,
but it didn't got merge.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK+RQeYzR97fOk8vhi+hnXPHki0HPyn3DVOkx-H=srX6pyNchg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
Landing a patch earlier lowers the chance of git conflict
for other patches being crafted in parallel with it; it
also removes the need for a core reviewer to get back to
it and +W later, in case enough +2 votes are there. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
I like the idea of adopting -1 instead of -2 and looking
whether it still works for the initial goal of avoiding
gate resets.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't think "-1" would work in case described by me.<br>
Patchset was already approved, and would still land in queue.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK+RQeYzR97fOk8vhi+hnXPHki0HPyn3DVOkx-H=srX6pyNchg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
btw does anyone know whether other projects apply a
similar cautious approach when dealing with their gate
breakages?
<div class="">
<div class="h5"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"> </span><br>
Ihar<br>
<br>
__________________________________________________________________________<br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK+RQeYzR97fOk8vhi+hnXPHki0HPyn3DVOkx-H=srX6pyNchg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>