On 9.10.2015 11:03, Jan Pazdziora wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:31:32AM +0200, Tomas Babej wrote: >> >> a heavy process. Also, I wouldn't be strict about it, as we already have >> a couple of workarounds, and not every time a workaround has a exact >> mapping to a particular ticket. > > Frankly, this worries me much more than not having ticket for some > trivial change to the code base. > > If there's workaround in tests, it's some action that we do but > users/admins don't in their real setups. And that can cause failures > for our users that we don't see or even no longer know about because > in our tests, we've cleverly worked around them. > > Either that workaround step is needed and needs to be documented, or > that step should not be needed and there should be a ticket describing > the issue.
+1 -- Petr^2 Spacek -- 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