1 |
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:32 AM, Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> 2. Every time a package is installed, or attempted to be installed, the |
4 |
> exit of that installation is qualified in one of a number of ways: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> - installed OK without tests |
7 |
|
8 |
While I think your proposal is a great one, I think this is actually |
9 |
the biggest limitation. A lot of our packages (most?) don't actually |
10 |
have tests that can be run on every build (most don't have tests, some |
11 |
have tests that take forever to run or can't be used on a clean |
12 |
install). |
13 |
|
14 |
While runtime testing doesn't HAVE to be extensive, we do want |
15 |
somebody to at least take a glance at it. |
16 |
|
17 |
If everything you're proposing is just on top of what we're already |
18 |
doing, then we have the issue that people aren't keeping up with the |
19 |
current workload, and even if that report is ultra-nice it is actually |
20 |
one more step than we have today. The workload would only go down if |
21 |
a machine could look at the report and stabilize things without input |
22 |
at least some of the time. |
23 |
|
24 |
-- |
25 |
Rich |