On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:56:35AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:42:51AM -0600, Tim Flink wrote: > > One of the differences in Fedora is that I expect most check/test > > contributions will come from package maintainers instead of dedicated > > QA folks. At this time, there just aren't enough available person hours > > among the Fedora QA folks to match the number of packages and > > components which are in Fedora. > > I *would* love to build up a community of people interested in creating > these tests. It seems like a relatively easy way to get involved. This, > to me, argues for the separate repo with distinct (more relaxed) > permissions. We don't have that "army" (as you say) now, but maybe if > we had an easy way to funnel new contributors to it, we could. Writing any tests closely precedes writing fixes for the bugs uncovered by those tests ;) So asking people to write tests, which will then (sometimes) fail, and having a separate process for the fixes that would need to touch the main repo, would be an exercise in frustration. It's a good principle to require both tests and fixes required for those tests to pass to be submitted and merged as a single pull request. I'd love to see a PR that adds a test for one of my packages, exposes some bugs, but immediately fixes any fallout. I would be less thrilled to have tests committed which will fail on the next rebuild, leaving me to fix the package (or manually override the tests). In the end, I'd prefer to get the first few test cases as pagure PRs, or patches in the bugzilla while pagure is not yet integrated, and then just allow that person to have commit rights to the main repo. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
