On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Julien Danjou <jul...@danjou.info> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26 2013, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > TL;DR: We will be automatically identifying your flaky tempest runs, so > you > > just have to confirm that you hit bug x, not identify which bug you hit. > > I love you guys. It's really painful to work these days due to the high > failure rate. > > I imagine the comment will indicate what should be done to have a > recheck? I saw Matthew acting like a bot in comments identifying bug > (and now I undertand he's a bot ;-), so should we just use the bug > number told to do a recheck, or will the procedure evolve? > We don't want to remove the developer from the loop entirely. Our classification won't be perfect and we want the developer to spot check to confirm they hit the bug we identified. But it should be an order of magnitude easier to spot check if we classified your failure correctly vs classifying the failure on your own. > > -- > Julien Danjou > -- Free Software hacker - independent consultant > -- http://julien.danjou.info >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
