Skip to content

Conversation

@aloknsingh
Copy link

spark version is taken from the environment variable SPARK_VERSION

…spark version is taken from the environment variable SPARK_VERSION
@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

nice! @shivaram

@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

ok to test. @aloknsingh Can you post a screenshot of what the logo looks like?

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Jun 23, 2015

Test build #35501 has finished for PR 6944 at commit acd5b85.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can remove SparkR from here and just make this Welcome to. That way the entire sentence will read Welcome to Spark

@shivaram
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @aloknsingh for the change. I had some minor comments inline. Also to reply to your question from the JIRA I'd say we can just keep the ASCII art as Spark right now.

…rkContext rather than the Sys.env.

2) change "Welcome to SparkR!" to "Welcome to" followed by Spark logo and version
@aloknsingh
Copy link
Author

@shivaram : I modified the code as per your suggestions.

@andrewor14 : Here is the screenshot.
spark-8111_sparklogo

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Jun 23, 2015

Test build #35564 has finished for PR 6944 at commit ed607bd.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@aloknsingh
Copy link
Author

Jenkins. Please retest.

@shivaram
Copy link
Contributor

@aloknsingh Actually the tests passed if you look at the Spark QA message (above the jenkins one) -- the jenkins plugin has an issue where it reports failures for some builds.

@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

retest this please

@shivaram
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM. Will merge once tests pass

@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

Hm, this should have just run the R tests.

@shivaram
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah I have no idea why that changed -- @JoshRosen did the limited unit test running thing change again ?

@JoshRosen
Copy link
Contributor

It looks like the pull request builder somehow thinks that the sql module changed.

@shivaram
Copy link
Contributor

hmm maybe it compared this PR to a different cached git commit ? I've seen that produce warnings for new classes added etc. before

@JoshRosen
Copy link
Contributor

There might have been a race if a PR that changed SQL was committed between the time that the PRB was triggered with a merge commit and the time that we fetched origin/master to do a comparison for changed files. We can probably fix this by using a different base / SHA to compute the diff.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Jun 23, 2015

Test build #35565 has finished for PR 6944 at commit ed607bd.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in f2fb028 Jun 23, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants