On 3.12.2015 15:34, Rob Crittenden wrote: > Martin Kosek wrote: >> On 12/03/2015 09:08 AM, Petr Spacek wrote: >>> On 2.12.2015 19:14, Rob Crittenden wrote: >>>> Is it still mandatory that tests pass the unit tests before acceptance? >>>> I've seen a number of cases over the past couple of months where a >>>> change goes through then shortly afterward a patch to fix the tests. >>>> IMHO this should be caught in advance. >>>> >>>> Things slip through and goodness knows I've acked more than a few >>>> patches without running the full suite. I just have a feeling it has >>>> become more frequent lately. >>> >>> When we are at it... An automated thingy which accepts URL to a Git repo, >>> does >>> all the test magic, and spits out test results without user interaction >>> would >>> be an awesome Christmas present! >>> >>> Bonus points if we can get Github integration so I can just push and have it >>> tested automatically so I cannot forget to do that before sending the patch >>> for review. >> >> +1. Having basic CI test suite run on top of a Pull Request would be awesome. >> > > I'd be happy with just the ipatests being run manually with each review. > > And it's then reviewer that I'm focusing on here. A developer _should_ > also run the tests but part of the reviewer's responsibility is to > ensure the patch does what it says it does without breaking things.
Sure. I'm just saying that people are notoriously bad automation tool, so I would like to off-load this kind of checks to a tool which will not forget or be lazy :-) -- 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
