On Wed, 17 Feb 2021, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 08:20:46 +0000 Lee Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2021, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 08:49:52 +0000 Lee Jones wrote: > > > > Yes, please share. > > > > > > https://github.com/kuba-moo/nipa > > > > Thanks for this. > > > > Oh, I see. So you conduct tests locally, then post them up in a > > section called 'Checks' using the provided API. > > For some definition of "locally" - NIPA runs on a rented VM. Right. Infrastructure that you control vs by Patchwork. > > I assume that Patchwork does not alert the user when something has > > gone awry? Is this something Nipa does? > > The way we run it on netdev is maintainer-centric, IOW we see > the failures in patchwork and complain to people manually. > The netdev mailing list gets too many messages as is, if NIPA > responded with results automatically (which is not that hard > technically) my concern is that people would be more likely to > send untested patches to the mailing list and rely on the bot. That makes sense. Thank you for the explanation. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
