Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net
mailto:s...@dague.net wrote:
waiting extra long for valid test results. People don't realize their
code can't pass and just keep pushing patches up consuming resources
which means that parts of
Sean Dague wrote:
As we're dealing with the fact that testtools 1.4.0 apparently broke
something with attribute additions to tests (needed by tempest for
filtering), it raises an interesting problem.
Our current policy on requirements is to leave them open ended, this
lets us take upstream
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:32:21PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote:
I think this idea has come up before, the problem is knowing how to
distinguish the sky is falling type bugs from other race bugs we know about.
Thinking out loud it could be severity of the bug in launchpad but we have a
lot of
On 11/18/2014 06:21 AM, Louis Taylor wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:32:21PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote:
I think this idea has come up before, the problem is knowing how to
distinguish the sky is falling type bugs from other race bugs we know about.
Thinking out loud it could be severity of
On 18/11/14 18:51, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net
mailto:s...@dague.net wrote:
waiting extra long for valid test results. People don't realize their
code can't pass and just keep pushing patches up consuming
Most production systems I know don't run with open ended dependencies.
One of our contributing issues IMO is that we have the requirements
duplicated everywhere - and then ignore them for many of our test runs
(we deliberately override the in-tree ones with global requirements).
Particularly,
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
waiting extra long for valid test results. People don't realize their
code can't pass and just keep pushing patches up consuming resources
which means that parts of the project that could pass tests, is backed
up behind 100%
Robert Collins wrote:
Most production systems I know don't run with open ended dependencies.
One of our contributing issues IMO is that we have the requirements
duplicated everywhere - and then ignore them for many of our test runs
(we deliberately override the in-tree ones with global
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:46:38AM +1030, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Maybe a MOTD at the top of http://review.openstack.org could help here? Have
a button that the QA/infra people can hit when everything is broken that puts
up a message there asking people to stop rechecking/submitting patches.
On 2014-11-17 16:41:02 -0800 (-0800), Joshua Harlow wrote:
Robert Collins wrote:
[...]
That said, making requirements be capped and auto adjust upwards would
be extremely useful IMO, but its a chunk of work;
- we need the transitive dependencies listed, not just direct dependencies
Sean Dague, thanks for bringing up the subject.
This is highly relevant to my interests. =)
On 2014-11-17 7:10 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
Most production systems I know don't run with open ended dependencies.
One of our contributing issues IMO is that we have the requirements
duplicated
Good point, we really need a better dependency resolver/installer...
Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2014-11-17 16:41:02 -0800 (-0800), Joshua Harlow wrote:
Robert Collins wrote:
[...]
That said, making requirements be capped and auto adjust upwards would
be extremely useful IMO, but its a chunk of
On 11/17/2014 6:57 PM, Louis Taylor wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:46:38AM +1030, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Maybe a MOTD at the top of http://review.openstack.org could help here? Have
a button that the QA/infra people can hit when everything is broken that puts
up a message there asking
13 matches
Mail list logo
