On (16/02/17 09:50), William Brown wrote: >On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 08:16 -0500, Mark Reynolds wrote: >> >> On 02/15/2017 04:48 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: >> > On (15/02/17 09:05), Jenkins wrote: >> >> See <http://vm-058-081.abc.idm.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com:8080/job/389-DS-NIGHTLY/165/> >> >> >> > Is there a reason why jenkins failures are ignored for a week? >> With our VERY limited resources, and other higher priority issues going >> on recently (like migrating to Pagure), no one has time to look into >> these upstream failures (most of which are probably false positives due >> to recent changes in lib389). We plan to look into them soon. >> >> You are also welcome to investigate some these failures if you would like :) > >And I've been buried in other tasks too. Normally it's Mark or I who >investigate these. > >There is one known test case failure that I've been working to resolve >which is this one: > >https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49086 > >Which if you look is one of the issues there in the error output: > > def test_ticket48272(topology_st): > >So I am working to fix this, but I want to fix it right, not fast. It's >a delicate area of code. > > > def test_ticket48906_dblock_default(topology_st): > >That test case is stupid, and my autotuning will break it. It needs to >be cleaned out. > > def test_basic_dse(topology_st, import_example_ldif): > >No idea why this one is failing at the moment, haven't started to look >at it. > I know that everyone is busy. But in our team we have a policy that new patches should not be pushed if tests are not green. It's much better to disable flaky test rather then ignore failures for a week my 2 cents LS _______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
