Re: Advancing to Patch::review

2020-12-03 Thread Jonas Hahnfeld
Am Donnerstag, dem 03.12.2020 um 12:33 + schrieb James: > On 03/12/2020 11:46, Michael Käppler wrote: > > What do you mean with "full reg test suite"? Additional examples that > > are not in the normal reg test suite? > > Well in the 'olden days' we'd have a set of tests on the website - here

Re: Advancing to Patch::review

2020-12-03 Thread James
On 03/12/2020 11:50, Michael Käppler wrote: "IIUC, a patch that fails 'make check' ('fails' in the sense of 'errors out') would have failed 'make test' in the old system, already." The 'old system' was me doing the tests manually in the order of make, make-testbaseline, make check, make doc

Re: Advancing to Patch::review

2020-12-03 Thread James
On 03/12/2020 11:50, Michael Käppler wrote: "IIUC, a patch that fails 'make check' ('fails' in the sense of 'errors out') would have failed 'make test' in the old system, already." The 'old system' was me doing the tests manually in the order of make, make-testbaseline, make check, make doc

Re: Advancing to Patch::review

2020-12-03 Thread James
On 03/12/2020 11:46, Michael Käppler wrote: What do you mean with "full reg test suite"? Additional examples that are not in the normal reg test suite? Well in the 'olden days' we'd have a set of tests on the website - here is an old URL that no longer works (http://lilypond.org/test/v2.13.

Re: Advancing to Patch::review

2020-12-03 Thread Michael Käppler
Am 03.12.2020 um 12:46 schrieb Michael Käppler: [snip] No, that step remains manually, if I'm not mistaken. IIUC, a patch that fails 'make check' ('fails' in the sense of 'errors out') would have failed 'make test' already. As I understood the (old) process, setting a patch to 'Review' should not

Re: Advancing to Patch::review

2020-12-03 Thread Michael Käppler
Am 03.12.2020 um 12:06 schrieb James: Hello, On 02/12/2020 20:57, Michael Käppler wrote: Am 02.12.2020 um 18:16 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: [snip] Circling back to my original proposal: My gut feeling is that this should be somebody else than the MR author Do I interpret your actions that you d

Re: Advancing to Patch::review

2020-12-03 Thread James
Hello, On 02/12/2020 20:57, Michael Käppler wrote: Am 02.12.2020 um 18:16 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: [snip] Circling back to my original proposal: My gut feeling is that this should be somebody else than the MR author Do I interpret your actions that you disagree with this? To elaborate a bit,