On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 02:40:29PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 16:31 -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > IMO the bar would only need to be that high if the user had no way to ignore the test results. > > All gating does here (IIUC) is require them to do an extra step before it automatically flows > > into the next rawhide compose. > > again, technically, yes, but *please* let's not train people to have a > pavlovian reaction to waive failures, that is not the way. IMO, the bar for *gating* tests needs to be high. I think 95% true positives would be a reasonable threshold. I know this is hard to achieve, but gating failures are very disruptive to packagers. And false positives are even more disruptime: a person not intimately familiar with the CI needs to spend a considerable amount of time jumping through not-very-easy-to-read pages. *If* I can be almost certain that the report is real and with enough digging I'll figure out a bug, I'm ready to spend the time. But if there's a considerable chance of a false positive _and_ the effort to figure out if the report is real is also quite high, I'll just learn to waive any failures. -- I cannot find it right now, but I hope it's still there somewhere… Bodhi updates have (had?) a message that said someting like "for failing update.* tests, contact <this channel>, for failing fedora-ci.* tests contact <that channel>". Is something like that planned for the coreos.* tests? Zbyszek -- _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
