cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Remi Bergsma <RBerg...@schubergphilis.com>
Subject Re: PRs for 4.9 Release
Date Thu, 07 Apr 2016 20:30:20 GMT
Great to see more and more people use the bubbles! 

Setting up:
https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-blueprint 

Using:
https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-toolkit

Happy testing :-)

Regards, Remi 

> On 07 Apr 2016, at 19:56, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com> wrote:
> 
> If you want me to verify things in your env, you can send me a tmate
> <https://tmate.io/> and I can have a look.
> 
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
> 
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
> 
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> yes, makes perfect sense. I skipped 1326 for now, I just tried to build
>> 1436 it fails in the rpm build fase. I am now going to try that ui thing to
>> build confidence in my test environment.
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Rafael Weingärtner <
>> rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Sure it makes.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Yes, if the PR is ONLY a test and does not touch any other code then we
>>> can
>>>> only run that test.  I agree with you.
>>>> 
>>>> If any code is changed outside the test, I always run the full suite.
>>> Make
>>>> sense?
>>>> 
>>>> *Will STEVENS*
>>>> Lead Developer
>>>> 
>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
>>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com
>>> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> running a new test in an environment should pass but should not
>> require
>>>> all
>>>>> other test being re-validated. SO what is the point of running all
>>>> others?
>>>>> I am not saying we shouldn't regularly run all tests but in this case
>>> it
>>>>> adds no value AFAICT.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yes, I want to run tests against the tests.  I have found issues
in
>>>> some
>>>>> of
>>>>>> the tests not working as expected, so I add the test to the run and
>>> run
>>>>>> them.  I think it is worth it because then we know the test is
>> valid
>>>>>> later.  I would rather have the author fix the test now if there
>> are
>>>>>> problems than having to work through it later.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am going to be doing a big push on getting testing cleaned up,
so
>>>> when
>>>>> I
>>>>>> start going through all the tests and validating them, I want to
>>> reduce
>>>>> the
>>>>>> amount of work I have to do, so validating the tests at source
>> makes
>>>>> sense.
>>>>>> :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> *Will STEVENS*
>>>>>> Lead Developer
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
>>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
>>>>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Daan Hoogland <
>>> daan.hoogland@gmail.com
>>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1326 is just a test. it does not touch production code. Do we
run
>>>>>>> regression tests against such PRs. seems a waste to me.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Daan Hoogland <
>>>> daan.hoogland@gmail.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Daan Hoogland <
>>>>> daan.hoogland@gmail.com
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 1326 - master (*pending CI)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ​starting​
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Daan
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Daan
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Daan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Rafael Weingärtner
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Daan
>> 
Mime
View raw message