On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:42:07PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote: > On Wed, 12/06 00:06, David Gibson wrote: > > > > Another approach would be to have a "known good" build that runs every > > > > so often. If the known good build fails, the bot disables itself (and > > > > tells you to investigate). Obviously there are ways that could not > > > > work as well, but it should catch a fair range of spurious failures. > > > > > > Interesting idea, yes. A slightly simplified way is to test the "base" of > > > the > > > series and only report errors if the base can pass. > > > > Right. I think that would catch even more cases, but means doing the > > "base" build every time, which might slow things down significantly. > > Every time when a test on topic branch failed, but not necessarily when it > passed, which is not that bad.
True. Sounds promising.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
