incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hugo Trippaers <HTrippa...@schubergphilis.com>
Subject RE: [MERGE]Storage refactor branch
Date Fri, 22 Feb 2013 10:45:47 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: donderdag 21 februari 2013 21:17
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Edison.su@citrix.com
> Cc: John Burwell <jburwell@basho.com> (jburwell@basho.com); Mike
> Tutkowski (mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com)
> Subject: Re: [MERGE]Storage refactor branch
> 
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 03:55:59PM -0500, Chip Childers wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 11:03:27AM -0800, Edison Su wrote:
> > > My branch is not a feature branch, while other features are depended on
> it. I didn't add any new feature on the branch, all the existing marvin
> automated tests should work. Instead of testing and fixing on my branch
> then merge, is it better to test and fix on master after the merge, using
> existing marvin test?
> >
> > IMO, it's not ever good to intentionally to break master.
> >
> 
> Edison - I see that you merged this into master today.  Is master now in a
> state where it's broken?  Did you run the marvin tests against your branch
> prior to the merge?

I'm pretty surprised by this merge. We have about three running threads on the developer list
regarding testing and the overall quality of the master branch. This particular merge thread
on the ML has valid concerns for testing of the branch, which have not been addressed. Yet
all this is ignored and the branch is merged anyway? This is not what we all agreed to do,
Edison, could you please explain why you did this? 

> 
> -chip

Mime
View raw message