On Jun 4, 2014, at 13:04, Dan Berindei <dan.berin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sa...@infinispan.org> wrote: > On 4 June 2014 08:08, Tomas Sykora <tsyk...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hello all, > > I'd like to know what is our policy in a following matter: > > > > I've wrote a new test which is failing. (local branch) > > > > 1) Do we want to integrate also failing test into our test-suite? To see > > the test failing regularly until the issue is fixed? I suppose no. > > 2) The other and clearly better "solution" is to push failing test into my > > own remote branch, create JIRA, let others to try out the issue from my > > remote branch and wait for fix, then, integrate (already passing) test into > > upstream. > > > > Is here any possible place for 1) as well? Or we strictly follow 2)? > > We strictly follow 2, as otherwise it gets very hard to tell if any > change is introducing regressions. > Any "fix" we make is surely well intentioned, but wathever you do, you > want to make sure the project is evolving in a better direction. > > > The only reason which I can see for a policy 1) is that the test would by > > failing regularly and wouldn't be easily overlooked. > > Issues are tracked on the issue tracker -> JIRA. > Traditionally faling tests have been attached as patch files on the > issue, pointing to a branch is much nicer of course.. > > OTOH personal branches will be removed at some point, but attached files > remain in JIRA. > So I'd keep a patch or a full test class attached in JIRA, and only add a > branch reference as a convenience. +1 for the patch files, more safe that way. Cheers, -- Mircea Markus Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
