Neutron has been in and out of the gate for the better part of the past month, 
and it didn't slow the pace of development one bit.  Most Neutron developers 
kept on working as if nothing was wrong, blithely merging changes with no 
guarantees that they weren't introducing new breakage.  New bugs were indeed 
merged, greatly increasing the time and effort required to get Neutron back in 
the gate.  I don't think this is sustainable, and I'd like to make a suggestion 
for how to minimize the impact of gate breakage.

For the record, I don't think consistent gate breakage in one project should be 
allowed to hold up the development of other projects.  The current approach of 
skipping tests or otherwise making a given job non-voting for innocent projects 
should continue.  It is arguably worth taking the risk of relaxing gating for 
those innocent projects rather than halting development unnecessarily.

However, I don't think it is a good idea to relax a broken gate for the 
offending project.  So if a broken job/test is clearly Neutron related, it 
should continue to gate Neutron, effectively preventing merges until the 
problem is fixed.  This would both raise the visibility of breakage beyond the 
person responsible for fixing it, and prevent additional breakage from slipping 
past were the gating to be relaxed.

Thoughts?


m.





_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to