On 10/08/2015 02:39 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 10/08/2015 02:08 PM, Oleg Fayans wrote:
Hi,

On 10/08/2015 11:18 AM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 11:12:37AM +0200, Oleg Fayans wrote:
When the ticket is addressed and these workarounds are no longer
needed -- what is our process for finding these workarounds and
reverting them, so that the tests test the real, expected behaviour?
As per discussion with Martin Basti, it was decided that this workaround
will only be applied to the current 4-2 branch, not to the upstream. In
That sounds like a reasonable plan for this issue.

upstream the issue itself will (supposedly) be solved
Except currently it's not, so (IIUIC) you will keep having
nondeterministic failures in master.

I was mostly interested in the general approach that we have to
workarounds -- how do we track them, how do we make sure they don't
stick in tests forever, even after the issue was already properly
addressed.

That's actually a great point. I personally would like tickets to have one more
field: "workaround" containing the address of a workaround in the format
"path_to_the_file:line_number" or better even - a commit id of this workaround,
so that once the ticket is resolved, we could easily find what to reverse.

Please don't add any more trac fields, there is too many of them already :-)
Keyword may serve better for now...

+1

new trac field for a few workarounds per year is not worth it.

--
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code

Reply via email to