Ádám Sághy wrote: > These does not sounds good to me! Should we double check what are the > issues and fix them first?
James Dailey wrote: > Well. Adam M also voted +1 so I took I to mean it was of minor > inconvenience. > Yep. I didn't see it as a reason to vote against the release--I assumed I was doing something wrong (re: integration/e2e tests) and others with more experience in the codebase would be able to do their own magic to get them to run and pass. I recall that, like Petri, I was running into an issue with oauth2 tests / cargo not starting. -- ( long-term / separate threads follow... ) I found it challenging to get integration/e2e tests running locally. I can now run one at a time in IntelliJ but the setup is complex and brittle. Running tests on a dev machine from the command line is somewhere I can offer some useful contributions, if/as desired. I'd like to first understand if it's my inexperience with this project or if there are fundamental issues with how the tests are set up. It would be useful to have an agreed-upon pre-release smoke test for these release votes. Surely GitHub actions/workflow are/will be useful for this, but personally I always hope to be able to locally run the same things that run in the cloud. Services like GitHub are handy but they can become just another capricious dependency.
