adds options t

Question

<https github com pantsbuild pants pull 8568> adds options to specify retry behavior and connection pool size when fetching from the v1 http artifact cache i tried to avoid adding any special logic and focused on just mapping pants option values to constructor args for `requests` and `urllib3` classes i d really like to merge this sooner rather than later so i will probably merge before Sunday if nobody has time to review this is a first attempt at solving this problem it s scoped to a single subsystem so we can deprecate this approach en masse if it turns out to be wrong at first which is why i m leaning towards trying to merge it earlier so i can get feedback from users on whether it s working this would be a massive win for many pants users at twitter who try to develop on a train or plane and i suspect it will be similarly useful for other organizations using pants

hundreds-father-404 · Answer

I m looking at it now but note that we should never merge without review gt i d really like to merge this sooner rather than later so i will probably merge before Sunday if nobody has time to review

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

what is the alternative

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

if people explicitly say i can t review and also please don t merge i would absolutely respect that

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

e g for 8542 that s going to stay dormant since i discussed with stu and he was concerned about introducing new syntax

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

i was trying to make the case that this change is simple enough and revertable enough that even if nobody else is paged in enough to review that i think it might be safe to do so

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

if that s still not something we allow which i guess makes perfect sense i guess i can just communicate with people and figure out who has time soon to review it

hundreds-father-404 · Answer

gt what is the alternative Pinging reviewers to ask them to review which often means things like DMing over Slack if they re free to review during the week But fundamentally we never should merge without review It s too dangerous of a precedent even for simple PRs

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

ok correction not merging without review

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

thanks eric i will absolutely remember that now

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

pants is a labor of love but that doesn t mean we get to be unprofessional

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

that was a note to self

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

and i can release pants internally so that our users can play around with these changes without merging in master yet

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

see this is all quite reasonable thanks again eric

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

sorry i had way too many meetings all week and am like 30 bonkers right now thanks for your patience all

happy-kitchen-89482 · Answer

Yes thanks for clarifying let s not merge without review except maybe to unbreak master in exceptional circumstances But generally speaking since we re not powering life support machines it can wait whatever it is