<https://github.com/pantsbuild/pants/pull/8568> ad...
# general
a
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.
h
I’m looking at it now, but note that we should never merge without review:
i’d really like to merge this sooner rather than later so i will probably merge before Sunday if nobody has time to review.
a
what is the alternative?
if people explicitly say "i can't review, and also please don't merge", i would absolutely respect that
e.g. for #8542 that's going to stay dormant since i discussed with stu and he was concerned about introducing new syntax
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.
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
h
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
👌 1
👖 1
a
ok, correction: not merging without review!
thanks eric i will absolutely remember that now
pants is a labor of love but that doesn't mean we get to be unprofessional
👖 1
(that was a note to self)
and i can release pants internally so that our users can play around with these changes without merging in master yet
see, this is all quite reasonable. thanks again eric
❤️ 1
sorry i had way too many meetings all week and am like 30% bonkers right now. thanks for your patience all
h
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...
👍 1
❤️ 1
👖 1