Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

expression: fix week func format (#9685) #9753

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Mar 25, 2019
Merged

expression: fix week func format (#9685) #9753

merged 8 commits into from
Mar 25, 2019

Conversation

glock42
Copy link
Contributor

@glock42 glock42 commented Mar 15, 2019 •
edited
Loading

What problem does this PR solve?

Cherry-pick #9685 to Release-2.1

What is changed and how it works?

See #9685

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test

@glock42
Copy link
Contributor Author

glock42 commented Mar 15, 2019 •
edited
Loading

I'm not familiar with the go module. Checksum go.sum failed in my local env. So I rm the file and rebuild it again, and works fine on my laptop. But it seems that can't pass the CI test. @qw4990

@morgo
Copy link
Contributor

morgo commented Mar 15, 2019

@zyycj what is your local go version? TiDB 2.1 is intended to be built with 1.11.3.

If you remove go.sum and tools/check/go.sum from your commit it should work.

@glock42
Copy link
Contributor Author

glock42 commented Mar 16, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@morgo My go version is 1.12. I remove the files and it seems to work. But maybe the sum files should not delete in the repo. So should I just keep the sum file same with the original version?

@morgo
Copy link
Contributor

morgo commented Mar 16, 2019

@zyycj yes, please just remove them from your commit. go 1.12 is used by master, but 1.11.3 is used by release-21. The problem is caused because it generates different go.sum files.

@shenli shenli added contribution This PR is from a community contributor. type/2.1 cherry-pick labels Mar 16, 2019
@erjiaqing
Copy link
Contributor

Question:
Can we merge builtinWeekWithModeSig and builtinWeekWithoutModeSig into one single function?

zz-jason
zz-jason reviewed Mar 25, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@zz-jason zz-jason left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@zz-jason zz-jason added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Mar 25, 2019
@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

/run-all-tests tidb-test=release-2.1 tikv=release-2.1 pd=release-2.1

XuHuaiyu
XuHuaiyu reviewed Mar 25, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@XuHuaiyu XuHuaiyu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@zz-jason zz-jason added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. status/all tests passed and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Mar 25, 2019
@zz-jason zz-jason merged commit e2bcb88 into pingcap:release-2.1 Mar 25, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@XuHuaiyu XuHuaiyu XuHuaiyu left review comments

@zz-jason zz-jason zz-jason approved these changes

@qw4990 qw4990 Awaiting requested review from qw4990

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
contribution This PR is from a community contributor. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@glock42 @morgo @erjiaqing @zz-jason @XuHuaiyu @shenli