It's strange to say something else than +1 or question the topic in any way.
Good call, Joan! -- ,,,^..^,,, On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi committers, > > I'd like to propose a change to our policy on version control, namely > that no check-ins be allowed on the master branch unless CI test runs > against that PR are clean. > > We've worked hard as a group to get runs clean. We need to protect > that achievement and investment in our test suite. That means not > letting rogue check-ins slip by because we are ignoring a red X in > GitHub (GH) from the Travis run. > > Things I see as exceptions: > * Changes to things clearly not related to the test suite, i.e. > documentation, support scripts, rel/overlay/etc/ files, etc. > * Changes already agreed upon in a previous PR/discussion for > administrative tasks > > Interesting situation right now for a discussion: Garren has a PR up[1] > that enables the mango tests to be part of the standard Travis/Jenkins > runs. Unfortunately, it doesn't pass on one of our platforms right now > and that needs investigation. Should we allow the PR to land and fix > the problems in master, or should the PR hold-up until it can land along > with the fixes for the failing mango tests? I can see both sides of this > argument. > > It may or may not be possible for our GH setup to actually prevent such > checkins (the Apache GH setup is somewhat restricted, and various things > like commit hooks and webhooks have to be configured by INFRA, not us). > > I'd like to further discuss whether people feel such a hook would be > acceptable, onerous or otherwise. Personally, I worry that such a setup > might prevent us from checking in some of the exceptions above, but if > there is a way around it, we could proceed down that path. > > What do you think, sirs?[2] > Joan > > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/753 > [2]: It's a Mystery Science Theatre 3000 Joel reference. :)
