On Sun, 2021-01-10 at 12:44 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 12:32 PM Adam Williamson > <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2021-01-09 at 12:27 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > > On 08.01.2021 23:24, Matthew Miller wrote: > > > > I think we should get to the point where it blocks manual pushes (without > > > > the failure being waved). If the test is broken, fix the test. > > > > > > Some tests are permanently broken. For example rpminspect-pipeline - > > > filesize. > > > > > > It's okay when the size of the files in the package changes, but it > > > always fails. > > > > That's not an openQA test, so not in the scope of this proposal. > > Sure, but perhaps we should establish a means to evaluate the > usefulness of tests on a regular cadence. Tests *can* provide value, > let's not kid ourselves, but if we just turn them on and train people > to ignore and waive them, then they're worse than a burden, they're a > waste. > > As part of enabling openQA tests, we should also establish a means to > evaluate the usefulness of *all* distro-wide checks. Is "I look at all the results every day" a means? :) I mean, I do. And I'll continue to. Even if a result is 'waived' for Bodhi purposes, I'll still see it as a failure in openQA. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
