On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 07:08:03PM +0530, Raghavendra Talur wrote: > a. Allowing re-running to tests to make them pass leads to complacency with > how tests are written. > b. A test is bad if it is not deterministic and running a bad test has *no* > value. We are wasting time even if the test runs for a few seconds. I agree with your vision for the long term, but my proposal address the short term situation. But we could use the retry approahc to fuel your blacklist approach: We could immagine a system where the retry feature would cast votes on individual tests: each time we fail once and succeed on retry, cast a +1 unreliable for the test. After a few days, we will have a wall of shame for unreliable tests, which could either be fixed or go to the blacklist. I do not know what software to use to collect and display the results, though. Should we have a gerrit change for each test? -- Emmanuel Dreyfus manu@xxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
