On 09/25/2012 07:26 PM, Jeff Darcy wrote:
On 09/25/2012 06:43 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
We intend to bring the following change in our gerrit based workflow:
- Introduce +2 and -2 for Verified in Gerrit
- +2 for Verified to be necessary for merging a patch
The intent of this proposed change is to get additional test coverage
and reduce the number of regressions that can sneak by. Jenkins would
continue to provide +1s for all submitted changes that pass basic smoke
tests. An additional +2 would be necessary from somebody who tests the
patch. Providing a +2 for Verified would be semantically similar to
adding a Tested-by: tag.
I like the idea generally, but I think it would be good to have a bit more
clarity about what testing +2 requires. Is self-testing OK, or must it be
someone else? Are manual tests OK, or must it be a (possibly new) part of the
standard functional/regression tests? If manual tests are OK, what level of
explanation is required w.r.t. what tests were run on what configuration? I
don't think we need to set the bar especially high right now, but IMO it does
need to be spelled out in our development-process doc.
Added details in the 'Patch Specific Verification' section here:
http://www.gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Development_Work_Flow_Proposed
Please feel free to comment/edit.
Thanks,
Vijay
