Sorry, wrong account.
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Eric Seidel <esei...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <m...@apple.com> wrote: >> It looks like the bot is adding a comment to the bug with the patch that was >> being processed when flakiness was detected, not the one that originally >> landed the tests believed to be flaky. Is that right? > > Correct. The original message was intended as a notice to the person > who's patch it was, explaining why there patch was taking so long. > (Flaky tests often double, triple or more the total time it takes to > commit a patch.) > >> If so, that doesn't seem like a great way to notify the author of the >> original test. It seems like it would be better to comment in the bug that >> added the test. > > Interesting possibility. > > What started this discussion is that last night we made the > commit-queue CC the original author of the flaky test every time we > posted one of these "we're slow to commit your patch because these > tests are flaky" messages. 4 flakes tests were hit last night after > we added that message, 3 of which were caused by tests authored by > Alexey -- hence he had extra mail in his inbox this morning and this > discussion ensued. As Adam noted, this was likely a statistical > fluke. > > Commenting on the original bug is a good idea, assuming the original > commit had a bug link. > >> To be fair, it's also possible that the new patch caused the flakiness, so >> a separate comment there could be useful. Perhaps it would be useful to >> determine if the test in question has a track record of flakiness. If not, >> then maybe the presumption should be that the patch is the problem, not the >> test. On the other hand, if the test has always been flaky, then the new >> patch probably has nothing to do with it. > > Definitely possible, but I've not ever seen this happen in practice. > Generally either the commit-queue fails due to the new flakiness, or > it gets landed and someone later finds and removes it. It would be > rare to have the new patch be adding new flakiness and the old test > author getting CC'd. Actually in that case, these CC's seem more > useful, as the old test author would be made aware of changes causing > his/her old test to go flaky. > > -eric > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
