On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:09:14PM +0200, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote: > On 03/24/2015 05:47 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote: > > > > > >On 03/24/2015 04:33 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > >>On (24/03/15 16:25), Pavel Reichl wrote: > >>>On 03/24/2015 04:08 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > >>>>On (23/03/15 17:53), Jakub Hrozek wrote: > >>>>>On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 05:03:03PM +0200, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote: > >>>>>>On 03/23/2015 03:59 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > >>>>>>>On (23/03/15 14:47), Pavel Reichl wrote: > >>>>>>>>On 03/23/2015 02:43 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > >>>>>>>>>On (23/03/15 14:18), Jakub Hrozek wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 02:07:12PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>ehlo, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>simple patch is attached. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>LS > >>>>>>>>>>Hm, the default CI test doesn't run distcheck? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>I admit I haven't ran distcheck myself, but was relying on the CI > >>>>>>>>>>link > >>>>>>>>>>Pavel sent.. > >>>>>>>>>That's the reason why I do not send link to CI result as an author > >>>>>>>>>of the > >>>>>>>>>patch. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>In my opinion it's reviewer's task. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>LS > >>>>>>>>What would be different if Jakub ran CI himself? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>If I had reviewd your patch i would have sent links to CI result which > >>>>>>>run all test (including distcheck and mock build) > >>>>>>I tend to agree with Pavel here: trusting developer's CI links might > >>>>>>save us > >>>>>>some time. It doesn't replace the patch-specific testing, where > >>>>>>necessary, of > >>>>>>course. > >>>>>The best would be if there was some tool that would grab the patches > >>>>>automagically and run the CI tests.. > >>>>> > >>>>If we want to safe a time then developers should run CI script locally > >>>>with enabled all tests. > >>>I think it would make my VM for development busy for a couple dozens of > >>>minutes and I would have to limit my work on it. I would prefer to use lab > >>>machines on this task... > >>You can run test in VM with one core. It would take longer, > >>but it would not block you. > >> > >>You can also run CI script directly not PC with all available resources > >>if you do not use it (lunch break, ...) > >I don't think you are serious about that, are you? We should strive to make > >this process as developer friendly as possible. I find pushing to remote > >branch and letting lab handle the task great and if the pool is too small > >for the mass of tasks we should ask management to provide more resources > >rather then planning to run CI locally in lunch break. > > I agree that running on servers is more convenient and efficient for > developers, if enough resources is provided. You basically don't have to care > about maintaining your own environment and your machine is free to do > something else. > > I don't like that our full test suite takes such a long time and that > developers have to wait in the queue. > > I would really like to setup VM spawning and enable running at least a few VMs > of each distro at the same time. However, I'm not sure if our lab can handle > that. Should we maybe try the private OpenStack instance, or even the public > one?
I would suggest pinging Petr Spacek, who maintains the current lab. He might know about some other internal resources we might be able to seize. _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
