Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:08:49 +0800 From: Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport@gmail.com> To: Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Li-Wen Hsu <lwhsu@freebsd.org>, fcp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FCP 20190401-ci_policy: CI policy Message-ID: <CAOfEmZhj5wL-i9CQoSpXV54%2BEeSrFnR0ay-9aGgUQrdkfqoC-A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <B8B361D5-A41E-4A40-91CC-A7E170457257@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAKBkRUwKKPKwRvUs00ja0%2BG9vCBB1pKhv6zBS-F-hb=pqMzSxQ@mail.gmail.com> <20190829114057.GZ71821@kib.kiev.ua> <412537DD-D98F-4B92-85F5-CB93CF33F281@FreeBSD.org> <20190829144228.GA71821@kib.kiev.ua> <B8B361D5-A41E-4A40-91CC-A7E170457257@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Em qui, 29 de ago de 2019 =C3=A0s 23:03, Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> escreveu: > 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=E2=80=99ve 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=E2=80=99m desperately afraid that if/when these bugs do get fixed we=E2= =80=99re > 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=E2=80=99re the best case scenario for bug reports ev= en, > because they come with a reproduction case built-in, and yet they=E2=80= =99re > still not getting fixed. This too is discouraging. > > I=E2=80=99m open to alternative proposals for how to address that problem= , but > I don=E2=80=99t think that =E2=80=9Ccontinue on as we always have=E2=80= =9D is the correct > OK, because of PF that is sort of deprecated on FreeBSD and it need some new rules to make it workable, everybody else need to abdicate to some new rules. Yes, right you are!!!! > answer. > > Best regards, > Kristof > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " > --=20 --=20 Marcelo Araujo (__)araujo@FreeBSD.org \\\'',)http://www.FreeBSD.org <http://www.freebsd.org/>; \/ \ ^ Power To Server. .\. /_)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOfEmZhj5wL-i9CQoSpXV54%2BEeSrFnR0ay-9aGgUQrdkfqoC-A>