Alexei Zakharov wrote:
In this case we can run against the situation when the test will
remain excluded forever for some platform.
Why? Our goal is to get rid of any excluded tests. Consider the
excluded tests as the existence of a regression, and we should work to
fix ASAP.
We aren't "parking" them there to be ignored - we're putting them there
so that the build can complete while we work on the fixes. We're in
essence "grandfathering-in" these regressions.
People have their own
problems. IMHO we should do this only if there are suspicions that the
test is platform dependent. Otherwise it is a waste of time IMO and CC
can handle this.
Could be - I don't see where the waste of time comes in.
geir
Thanks,
24.11.06, Geir Magnusson Jr.<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> написал(а):
Why not just remove from the platforms you have, and ask others to
update (or not) platforms you don't have as appropriate?
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
> Alexei Zakharov wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> So we just should choice what is better: to break sometimes tests run
>>> or to
>>> forget enable test(s) on some platforms.
>> Yesterday, when I was removing one of the beans tests from exclude
>> lists, I feel a bit uncomfortable while updating
>> exclude.linux.x86_64.xxx since I have no (easy) access to such systems
>> and had no plans to run tests on it. IMHO (in the perfect world) the
>> fact that I remove or add something from / to exclude.linux.x86_64
>> means I've at least ran tests for this platform and obtained some
>> result. So let's have a common list, it's easier to deal with it
>> psychologically. :-)
>>
>> As for above question: +1 for being optimists, i.e. to remove the test
>> from common list if it passes on all platforms available to tester.
>
> +1 (otherwise I'll share the psychotherapy costs with you :-)
>
> Regards,
> Tim
