I am a bit leery of this. A test failure should not occur and I'm not sure everyone will be diligent in tracking their errors. IMO, tests that are randomly failing elsewhere should be disabled and fixed by whoever owns them (i.e. if some non-related test keeps failing, push a patch to disable it and send a note to the list for someone to fix it).
A verification build can be retriggered after failure if it just hiccups unexpectedly (e.g. Eclipse.org issue). If one follows the build started message URL and logs in, the build can be retriggered. A success will then remove the veto. Looking at the linuxtools-gerrit job, it appears that Alex, myself, Roland, Sami, and Patrick have the ability to build. We could add yourself and others to the build list. Worst case scenario is you can ask one of us who has access to retrigger the build if you feel it is randomly failing. -- Jeff J. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexandre Montplaisir" <alexmon...@voxpopuli.im> To: "Linux Tools developer discussions" <linuxtools-dev@eclipse.org> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 6:01:45 PM Subject: [linuxtools-dev] Hudson CI NAK'ing patches Hi all, What would you think of making the Hudson-Gerrit plugin (a.k.a. Hudson CI) giving "-1 Code Review" on Gerrit, instead of the current "-1 Verified"? The difference is that a committer can override a -1 CR when giving it a +2, which allows pushing the patch anyway. When "-1 Verified" is given however, the patch is effectively veto'ed and cannot be merged at all through Gerrit, unless you rebase it manually, or if you push it directly through Git. We do appreciate Hudson CI running the compilation/tests and reporting the results. It's very helpful! However there are cases where the failures are unrelated to the code being reviewed (unit test failures in other projects, random brokage at Eclipse, etc.) and, imo, the human should be able to ignore what Hudson says. Without having to resort to dirty tricks like push-it-before-Hudson-runs or pushing through Git. I'm not sure how to change this, but CDT has their Gerrit set up this way, if I'm not mistaken. What do you think? Cheers, Alexandre _______________________________________________ linuxtools-dev mailing list linuxtools-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxtools-dev _______________________________________________ linuxtools-dev mailing list linuxtools-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxtools-dev
