On (03/12/15 15:53), Petr Spacek wrote: >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, patches are always welcomed.
LS -- 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
