Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



----- Original Message -----
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 20:35:08 +0100
> Miloslav Trmač <mitr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> 
> ...snip...
> 
> > >> Finally, the planning process will recognize the existence of
> > >> these
> > >> tiers by classifying each proposed change:
> > >>
> > >> * Changes to tiers 1 and 2:
> > >>     Strong recommendation that new stable APIs have new tests
> > >> delivered at approximately the same time, if possible. This
> > >> benefits change owners by diminishing the risk of accidental
> > >> breakage of the functionality. Existing tests for the
> > >> functionality must be updated at the same time as well.
> > >>     Waivers may be requested of FESCo.
> > >
> > > Are you envisioning the package maintainers to have to write
> > > these
> > > tests if they don't exist upstream?
> > 
> > Yes.
> 
> Are these tests that run as part of package build?
> Or are we talking something like autoqa tests? Or ?

The idea is autoqa (but those test run as part of package build could
be part of it too). Yes, it means it will take a time to have a good
set of tests and with autoqa support it's main problem I see but...

>  
> > My personal opinion:
> > 
> > * For UI and APIs, we want the things included in tier 2 to be
> > sufficiently stable/tested, which probably means they should
> > already
> > have an upstream test suite; if they don't, and Fedora decides that
> > they
> > are important, Fedora should contribute an upstream test suite.
> > 
> > * I expect that many "change" owners will find it worth their time
> > to
> > write a test - e.g. in the above example of Avahi it's one-time
> > cost
> > of writing a fairly simple test that will save manual checking and
> > worry for the future.
> 
> How is this gating to rawhide going to work?
> 
> Or that's yet to be determined?
> 
> While I like the idea overall, I think the devil will be in the
> details
> here. :) If we make the tests too strict, we are going to slow things
> down, if we make them too manual we push more work on rel-eng, if we
> don't make them strict enough, we have what we have today, but with
> more red tape.

Yep, it's really about the detail - that's why we have this thread.
In the beginning it can definitely cause slow downs...

>From tooling perspective - that's the question if we want to enhance
our tools, step into other similar project (for collaboration with
our downstreams? other distros...).

Jaroslav

> 
> kevin
> 
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux