aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joshua Cohen <jco...@twopensource.com>
Subject Re: Testing Done in RB?
Date Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:07:36 GMT
Thanks Joe!

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Joseph Smith <yasumoto7@gmail.com> wrote:

> I’m ambivalent either way, but overall sounds like a good path forward, so
> filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1147 <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1147>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 2015, at 10:55, Joshua Cohen <jcohen@twopensource.com> wrote:
> >
> > If we decide to remove the 'Testing Done' section from commit messages
> then
> > we should definitely update CONTRIBUTING.md[1] to codify the practice.
> >
> > [1]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-aurora/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm generally -1 to requiring humans to perform (what i perceive to be)
> >> superfluous redundant tasks.
> >>
> >> In this case, the standard suite of tests should be expected as part of
> any
> >> patch affecting code, which is why the review bot runs them.  For that
> >> reason, i've mostly been using 'Testing done' to reference additional
> >> testing.
> >>
> >> I'm a stronger -1 on including this field in commit messages, for the
> >> reason Maxim notes above.
> >>
> >> -=Bill
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <maxim@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am +1 on filling the test section as it may be a good indicator of
> >>> what testing has been attempted (e.g. java-only, python-only, python
> >>> sub-target, vagrant e2e, vagrant manual).
> >>>
> >>> I am -1 on having this included into the commit message as it blows up
> >>> the commit message size and makes for a hard to read arbitrary
> >>> length/formatted commit. The RB link should be enough to get commit
> >>> details and testing done.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Joshua Cohen <
> jcohen@twopensource.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> This came up in a review and I figured it'd be better discussed here
> >>> rather
> >>>> than in a review that most folks probably aren't reading.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do people find value in this section being filled in? The argument
> >>> against
> >>>> is generally that it's always the same value and if we wait for a ship
> >> it
> >>>> from ReviewBot we have assurance that everything is kosher. The
> >> argument
> >>>> for is that it serves as an example for new committers on how to run
> >>> tests,
> >>>> however this was on the assumption that the full commit message from
> >> `rbt
> >>>> patch` was used. It seems that some people edit the testing done
> >> section
> >>>> out before merging commits from RB(?).
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>>
> >>>> Joshua
> >>>
> >>
>
>

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