[gmx-developers] upcoming downtime on Monday

[Mark Abraham]

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:09 PM, Roland Schulz <roland at utk.edu> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I suggest we change the gerrit setting change.largeChange from 500 to
> 1000 (at what point the size bar is red).
>

Sounds good for the forseeable future. Not sure where it is - if you know,
please do it.


> Also I think we should try harder to break changes into small easy
> reviewable patches. Changes such as: https://gerrit.gromacs.org/#/c/3471
> are too big to be reviewed efficiencly.
>

True, but it'd be nice also if we were all a little more cooperative with
reviewing low-impact patches (e.g. clean up or file renaming that doesn't
change functionality) so that people aren't tempted to write monolithic
patches (where, when their ship comes in, they all come in at once...). For
example, having gone a fair way into development of 3471, David might
recognize that he could split that patch into
1. move the existing functionality into the newly named files, get most of
the tools to call it from the new place in the old way
2. import lmfit, change existing functionality to use it, add tests
3. any genuinely new stuff (if any; not apparent to me right now)

Patch 1 ought to be easy and fast to review (no functional changes), and
patch 2 should be faster to review than 1+2 altogether. Today, I did some
review on "new-seeming" code in 3471 that upon closer inspection was just
old code moved to a new file - had I submitted that part of my review,
David would likely have had to say "well, sure, but that's not code I
wrote, or that I'm working on here." The split of 1 & 2 would make that
clear to reviewers up front.

That said, I've had poor experiences with (say)
https://gerrit.gromacs.org/#/q/topic:g-tune-pme-reform, where people have
reviewed some changes and not enough people have reviewed their pre-reqs,
etc. I have a bunch more (IMO) decently atomic commits for fixing tune-pme
sitting in a long-forgotten repo on a drive... I can't say
https://gerrit.gromacs.org/#/q/topic:bondeds has been a compelling
experience, either. I don't mean this as criticism of any one or any group
- but I do think that with more than 100 outstanding patches in Gerrit and
a long-time-average merge rate of about 2 per day (
https://gerrit.gromacs.org/#/q/project:gromacs+status:merged), we all need
to pitch in harder with review and review-response, and less on doing our
own cool new things.

Mark

Roland
>
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Mark Abraham <mark.j.abraham at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>>  We now have gerrit 2.9.1 deployed, and bs_mac upgraded to Mavericks and
>> XCode 5.1. Everything should be usable, do yell if not! If bs_mac + icc
>> still misbehaves then we'll bump icc version or something.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Roland Schulz <roland at utk.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>  we could install Gerrit-Trigger Jenkins-plugin 2.12-beta. It fixes the
>>> issue that the matrix job isn't canceled when a newer change is uploaded:
>>> https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-24295
>>> We would need to build it ourselves because 2.12-beta-5 which will
>>> include the patch isn't out yet. Let me know - it should be easy for me to
>>> build it.
>>>
>>
>>  Sounds good. I am out of time for this today, but if you can build it
>> then we can deploy it without taking gerrit down.
>>
>>  Mark
>>
>>   Roland
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Mark Abraham <mark.j.abraham at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Hi,
>>>>
>>>>  The Jenkins Mac build slave needs an OS upgrade to keep up with Xcode
>>>> versions, which we hope will fix the way the mac+icc CI build segfaults
>>>> occasionally. Rossen's going to do that on Monday. There's a newer Gerrit
>>>> version out that has a bug fix that I'm keen to use, so I'll also upgrade
>>>> Gerrit on Monday so we have less overall downtime. Jenkins and Redmine are
>>>> probably OK for now. We should bump our icc versions, but we don't need a
>>>> downtime for that. Anything else people can think of we should fix?
>>>>
>>>>  Mark
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>> ORNL/UT Center for Molecular Biophysics cmb.ornl.gov
>>> 865-241-1537, ORNL PO BOX 2008 MS6309
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gromacs Developers mailing list
>>>
>>> * Please search the archive at
>>> http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/GMX-developers_List before
>>> posting!
>>>
>>> * Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
>>>
>>> * For (un)subscribe requests visit
>>> https://maillist.sys.kth.se/mailman/listinfo/gromacs.org_gmx-developers
>>> or send a mail to gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ORNL/UT Center for Molecular Biophysics cmb.ornl.gov
> 865-241-1537, ORNL PO BOX 2008 MS6309
>
> --
> Gromacs Developers mailing list
>
> * Please search the archive at
> http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/GMX-developers_List before
> posting!
>
> * Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
>
> * For (un)subscribe requests visit
> https://maillist.sys.kth.se/mailman/listinfo/gromacs.org_gmx-developers
> or send a mail to gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://maillist.sys.kth.se/pipermail/gromacs.org_gmx-developers/attachments/20140918/660d9f40/attachment-0001.html>