From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Thu Aug 29 15:37:20 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6052D9C9A; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:37:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46K6Dc3xYNz3Lwf; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:37:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kib.kiev.ua (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x7TFbChh018671 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 18:37:15 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua x7TFbChh018671 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x7TFbCjH018670; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 18:37:12 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 18:37:12 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov To: Kristof Provost Cc: Li-Wen Hsu , FreeBSD Hackers , fcp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FCP 20190401-ci_policy: CI policy Message-ID: <20190829153712.GB71821@kib.kiev.ua> References: <20190829114057.GZ71821@kib.kiev.ua> <412537DD-D98F-4B92-85F5-CB93CF33F281@FreeBSD.org> <20190829144228.GA71821@kib.kiev.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on tom.home X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46K6Dc3xYNz3Lwf X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.90 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.996,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.91)[-0.906,0] X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:37:20 -0000 On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 05:02:47PM +0200, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 29 Aug 2019, at 16:42, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 02:03:00PM +0200, Kristof Provost wrote: > >> There are, somewhat regularly, commits which break functionality, or > >> at > >> the very least tests. > >> The main objective of this policy proposal is to try to improve > >> overall > >> code quality by encouraging and empowering all committers to > >> investigate > >> and fix test failures. > > But this policy does not encourage, if anything. > > It gives a free ticket to revert, discouraging committers. > > > To provide a counterpoint here: my personal frustration right now is > that I’ve spent a good bit of time adding tests for pf and fixing bugs > for it, only to see the tests having to be disabled because of unrelated > (to pf) changes in the network stack. > > Either through lack of visibility, or lack of time, or because people > assume pf tests failures must by definition be the responsibility of the > pf maintainer, these failures have not been investigated by anyone other > than me, and I lack the time and subject matter expertise to fix them. > > I’m desperately afraid that if/when these bugs do get fixed we’re > going to discover that other things have broken in the mean time, and > the tests are still going to fail, for different reasons. > > These are bugs. They’re the best case scenario for bug reports even, > because they come with a reproduction case built-in, and yet they’re > still not getting fixed. This too is discouraging. I fully agree with your attitude there, and understand your frustration. IMO the right action would be to contact the committers who did the relevant changes, first. Was it done ? What was their response ? If they are silent, next action would be some public mail. Do you know where the bug is ? If yes, how hard is to fix it ? > > I’m open to alternative proposals for how to address that problem, but > I don’t think that “continue on as we always have” is the correct > answer. > > Best regards, > Kristof