On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 6:11 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <ava...@gmail.com> writes: > >> My general approach when writing & maintaining this poison has been >> that it's fine if we skip some tests, even though we could be bending >> over backwards to run them, or even if we don't know the root cause >> beyond "the rebase machinery is always broken with poison". >> >> This is because once I'm satisfied that the breaking test isn't >> because of some new plumbing message that got i18n'd I don't see the >> point of keeping digging, it's fine to just skip the test, because we >> run it when we're not under poison, and we're satisfied that it's not >> breaking because of a new plumbing message being i18n'd we've >> fulfilled the entire reason for why this poison facility exists in the >> first place. > > As to skipping tests, I am worried mostly because it is very easy to > mark one test as skipped under poison build, even where the side > effect from that test left behind in the trash repository is a > prerequisite for a later test to succeed. For example, a test that > creates a tag may be marked as skipped-under-poison. Then a new > test that is added to such a test may want to do something using > that tag, and it will succeed in the usual test. As most people do > not test poison build, when somebody notices that the new test fails > under poison build, it is unclear if the breakage is due to new i18n > issues or something else, like a missing prerequisite tag due to > skipping an earlier test.
Indeed, I've tried to be careful not to introduce bugs like that, but in this skipped case the tests look completely stand-alone to me. In any case, I like my other patch to just remove this whole thing better.
