On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:56:35AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:42:51AM -0600, Tim Flink wrote:
> > One of the differences in Fedora is that I expect most check/test
> > contributions will come from package maintainers instead of dedicated
> > QA folks. At this time, there just aren't enough available person hours
> > among the Fedora QA folks to match the number of packages and
> > components which are in Fedora.
> I *would* love to build up a community of people interested in creating
> these tests. It seems like a relatively easy way to get involved. This,
> to me, argues for the separate repo with distinct (more relaxed)
> permissions. We don't have that "army" (as you say) now, but maybe if
> we had an easy way to funnel new contributors to it, we could.
Writing any tests closely precedes writing fixes for the bugs
uncovered by those tests ;) So asking people to write tests, which
will then (sometimes) fail, and having a separate process for the
fixes that would need to touch the main repo, would be an exercise in
It's a good principle to require both tests and fixes required for
those tests to pass to be submitted and merged as a single pull request.
I'd love to see a PR that adds a test for one of my packages, exposes
some bugs, but immediately fixes any fallout. I would be less thrilled
to have tests committed which will fail on the next rebuild, leaving me to
fix the package (or manually override the tests).
In the end, I'd prefer to get the first few test cases as pagure PRs,
or patches in the bugzilla while pagure is not yet integrated, and
then just allow that person to have commit rights to the main repo.
devel mailing list -- email@example.com
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org