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

Reply via email to