On Sun, 2021-01-10 at 12:44 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 12:32 PM Adam Williamson
> <adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Sat, 2021-01-09 at 12:27 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > On 08.01.2021 23:24, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > > I think we should get to the point where it blocks manual pushes 
> > > > (without
> > > > the failure being waved). If the test is broken, fix the test.
> > > 
> > > Some tests are permanently broken. For example rpminspect-pipeline -
> > > filesize.
> > > 
> > > It's okay when the size of the files in the package changes, but it
> > > always fails.
> > 
> > That's not an openQA test, so not in the scope of this proposal.
> 
> Sure, but perhaps we should establish a means to evaluate the
> usefulness of tests on a regular cadence. Tests *can* provide value,
> let's not kid ourselves, but if we just turn them on and train people
> to ignore and waive them, then they're worse than a burden, they're a
> waste.
> 
> As part of enabling openQA tests, we should also establish a means to
> evaluate the usefulness of *all* distro-wide checks.

Is "I look at all the results every day" a means? :) I mean, I do. And
I'll continue to. Even if a result is 'waived' for Bodhi purposes, I'll
still see it as a failure in openQA.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net


_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to