On 06/19/2014 06:14 PM, Justin Clift wrote:
On 19/06/2014, at 1:23 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
hi,
I was told that Justin and I were given permission to mark a patch as
verified+1 when the tests that failed are spurious failures. I think this
process can be automated as well. I already have a script to parse the Console
log to identify the tests that failed (I send mails using this, yet to automate
the mailing part). What we need to do now is the following:
1) Find the list of tests that are modified/added as part of the commit.
2) Parse the list of tests that failed the full regression (I already have this
script).
Run 'prove' on these files separately say 5/10 times. If a particular test
fails all the time. It is a real failure with more probability. Otherwise it is
a spurious failure.
If a file that is added as a new test fails even a single time, lets accept the
patch after fixing the failures.
Otherwise we can give +1 on it, instead of Justin/I manually doing it.
Sounds good to me. :)
+ Justin
Also send a mail to gluster-devel about the failures for each test.
We'll might want to make that weekly or something? There are several failures
every day. :/
Agreed.
Pranith
+ Justin
--
GlusterFS - http://www.gluster.org
An open source, distributed file system scaling to several
petabytes, and handling thousands of clients.
My personal twitter: twitter.com/realjustinclift
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
