What's the general consensus on flakiness of the pipeline for this purpose? If there is consensus that it's still too flaky to disable the merge button on failure, we should probably consider doubling down on that issue again. It's hard to tell from just looking at the dev pipeline because you cannot see easily what failures were legitimate.
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 8:47 AM Bruce Schuchardt <bschucha...@pivotal.io> wrote: > I'm in favor of this. > > Several times over the years we've made a big push to get precheckin to > reliably only to see rapid degradation due to crappy code being pushed > in the face of precheckin failures. We've just invested another half > year doing it again. Are we going to do things differently now? > Disabling the Merge button on test failure might be a good start. > > On 11/9/18 12:55 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Kirks emails reminded me - I think we are at the point now with our PR > > checks where we should not be merging anything to develop that doesn't > pass > > all of the PR checks. > > > > I propose we disable the merge button unless a PR is passing all of the > > checks. If we are in agreement I'll follow up with infra to see how to > make > > that happen. > > > > This would not completely prevent pushing directly to develop from the > > command line, but since most developers seem to be using the github UI, I > > hope that it will steer people towards getting the PRs passing instead of > > using the command line. > > > > Thoughts? > > -Dan > > > >
