<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Satish Balay <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:balay@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">balay@mcs.anl.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
On Fri, 10 Nov 2017, Richard Tran Mills wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hi Satish,<br>
><br>
> Thanks for taking the initiative to switch to testing next-tmp to help<br>
> clear up the constipation with moving things into master. It looks like<br>
> there hasn't been any graduation of the branches you've been putting into<br>
> next-tmp in a few days, though. Is this just because you haven't had time<br>
> to do any more of these merges, or are the tests breaking with next-tmp now?<br>
><br>
> If I go to the dashboard at<br>
> <a href="http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/nightlylogs/archive/2017/11/10/next.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/<wbr>petsc/nightlylogs/archive/<wbr>2017/11/10/next.html</a>,<br>
> is this showing me the info for 'next' or 'next-tmp'? If it is showing me<br>
> 'next', how do I find the results for 'next-tmp'?<br>
<br>
</span>Sorry - I haven't been checking properly on this.<br>
<br>
The last next-tmp build was on:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/nightlylogs/archive/2017/11/07/next.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/<wbr>petsc/nightlylogs/archive/<wbr>2017/11/07/next.html</a><br>
<br>
There were some errors - which I didn't debug.<br>
<br>
$ git fetch -p && comm -12 <(git branch -r --merged origin/next-tmp | sort) <(git branch -r --no-merged origin/master | sort)<br>
origin/hongzh/add-tstraj-<wbr>filename<br>
origin/hongzh/copy_l2g_stencil<br>
origin/jed/variadic-malloc<br>
origin/rmills/feature-aijmkl-<wbr>matmatmult<br>
<br>
[Its probably one of the above branches. I'll look for it - and then<br>
merge the others to master.]<br>
<br>
So I reverted the tests back to next stating 08<br>
<br>
<a href="http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/nightlylogs/archive/2017/11/08/next.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/<wbr>petsc/nightlylogs/archive/<wbr>2017/11/08/next.html</a><br>
<br>
Yeah - next vs next-tmp is not clearly visible here - but if you go to<br>
any of the logs - you'll see next or next-tmp on the filename.<br>
<br>
For eg:<br>
<a href="http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/nightlylogs/archive/2017/11/07/examples_full_next-tmp.log" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/<wbr>petsc/nightlylogs/archive/<wbr>2017/11/07/examples_full_next-<wbr>tmp.log</a><br>
<a href="http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/nightlylogs/archive/2017/11/08/examples_full_next.log" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/<wbr>petsc/nightlylogs/archive/<wbr>2017/11/08/examples_full_next.<wbr>log</a><br>
<span class=""><br>
> If we think a branch may be ready for 'master', should we still be merging<br>
> to 'next', given it's current broken state?<br>
<br>
</span>For now - I would say - if you now a bunch of branches that you think<br>
are ready (master) - I can schedule a next-tmp test on them to verify.<br>
<br>
The tricky thing here is for all of us to be aware of this - and not<br>
assume next is tested - and merge then go ahead and merge the wrong<br>
branches to master.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> Lastly, a question for everyone: If someone knows that they have merged<br>
> something into 'next' that has broken the builds or tests, and it is going<br>
> to be a while before this is fixed, should they revert that changeset in<br>
> 'next'? I see some reverts in the 'next' logs, but not that many. Maybe<br>
> this is because it's not always easy to tell if one's particular changeset<br>
> broke things when there are all these other changes being merged.<br>
<br>
</span>Reverts are tricky - hence I avoid them. But if needed - we could do<br>
that [it requires extra care in the workflow - i.e when you have to<br>
merge back later - or revert again for the second time etc.]<br>
<br>
Alternative is to delete/recreate next - if needed. [but it requires<br>
all next users to do this delete/recreation]<br>
<br>
In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..</blockquote><div><br></div><div>1) I think next really prevents master from getting screwed up (witness next)</div><div><br></div><div>2) I think we are actually finding interaction bugs there.</div><div><br></div><div>Are those points wrong, or is there another way to do these things?</div><div><br></div><div> Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div> Matt</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Satish<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead.<br>-- Norbert Wiener</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://www.caam.rice.edu/~mk51/" target="_blank">https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/</a><br></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>