accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Dev branches reflecting minor/major versions, not bugfixes
Date Mon, 12 May 2014 15:00:10 GMT
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5/12/14, 10:41 AM, Keith Turner wrote:
>
>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>  >SGTM. Looks like there aren't currently any fixes of much substance for
>>> >1.6.1 presently, but there are a few that would make for a very-low
>>> impact
>>> >1.6.1, and a good 1.5.2 which also includes the fallout tickets shortly
>>> >after 1.5.1. Timeframe looks good to me too.
>>> >
>>> >If we can get that reduced test burden for "real" bug-fix releases
>>> >hammered out, a month sounds good to me.
>>>
>>
>> Rather than reduce the test burden, it would be nice to make the cluster
>> testing more automated like you and other have discussed.
>>
>
> I think that would be a good parallel goal, but I would still think that 7
> days of testing for a bug-fix release is excessive. Most times for me the
> pain is getting resources to test for such a long period, not necessarily
> setting up the test.
>


I see.  Wether or not the testing is excessive depends on the bug fixes.
We could relax the goal and let decisions be made per release.  A possible
way to do this would be to not require anything beyond mvn verify AND
people can -1 a release if they do not think sufficient testing was done.
This makes it easy to make the testing decisions per release using the
existing release voting mechanism.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message