100% agree François and team wrote a doc on testing and gating commits Blake wrote a doc on testing and gating commits Every release there’s a thread on testing and gating commits
People are the common factor every time. Nobody wants to avoid merging their patch because someone broke a test elsewhere. We can’t block merging technically with the repo as it exists now so it’s always going to come down to people and peer pressure, until or unless someone starts reverting commits that break tests (Of course, someone could write a tool that automatically reverts new commits as long as tests fail....) On Jan 23, 2020, at 5:54 PM, Joshua McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> >> >> I am reacting to what I currently see >> happening in the project; tests fail as the norm and this is kinda seen as >> expected, even though it goes against the policies as I understand it. > > After over half a decade seeing us all continue to struggle with this > problem, I've come around to the school of "apply pain" (I mean that as > light-hearted as you can take it) when there's a failure to incent fixing; > specifically in this case, the only idea I can think of is preventing merge > w/any failing tests on a PR. We go through this cycle as we approach each > major release: we have the gatekeeper of "we're not going to cut a release > with failing tests obviously", and we clean them up. After the release, the > pressure is off, we exhale, relax, and flaky test failures (and others) > start to creep back in. > > If the status quo is the world we want to live in, that's totally fine and > no judgement intended - we can build tooling around test failure history > and known flaky tests etc to optimize engineer workflows around that > expectation. But what I keep seeing on threads like this (and have always > heard brought up in conversation) is that our collective *moral* stance is > that we should have green test boards and not merge code if it introduces > failing tests. > > Not looking to prescribe or recommend anything, just hoping that > observation above might be of interest or value to the conversation. > >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 4:17 PM Michael Shuler <mich...@pbandjelly.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 1/23/20 3:53 PM, David Capwell wrote: >>> >>> 2) Nightly build email to dev@? >> >> Nope. builds@c.a.o is where these go. >> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?bui...@cassandra.apache.org >> >> Michael >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
