-Re: [DISCUSSION] Policy proposal for JIRAs opened for unit test failures without patches attached
Oh yeah. That's definitely something to communicate.
I think your initial point was more nuanced, and I agree that filing a jira for a failing test is only usefully if somebody actually plans to work on it.
From: Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2012 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Policy proposal for JIRAs opened for unit test failures without patches attached
> I'd say we keep the pressure up for failing tests... I.e. we file jiras.
I'm not advocating against filing JIRAs for failing tests.
I'm advocating for encouraging *users* to not put up JIRAs for failing tests without a patch for the problem.
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:09 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd say we keep the pressure up for failing tests... I.e. we file jiras.
>IMHO, a failing test should either be fixed or disabled, otherwise it just adds noise.
>(This is true for even occasionally failing tests. We have > 1000 tests, if we have many tests that fail just once/100 runs, we get frequent build failures.)
>Just my $0.02.
> From: Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: HBase Dev List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2012 11:26 AM
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Policy proposal for JIRAs opened for unit test failures without patches attached
>On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There has been a recent uptick in JIRAs opened for unit test failures
>> without patches attached. Since these merely duplicate information readily
>> available on our Jenkins, we should institute a policy of closing them as
>> Invalid if a patch is not attached to the JIRA in a timely manner (within
>> hours). Simply pointing out a failing test is not
>> a consequential contribution. We should also update the How To Contribute
>> documentation accordingly.
>I can go either way.
>On the one hand our JIRA has loads of issues opened against failing
>tests that we need to clear up as now as either fixed, invalid, or
>still pertinent. Would be better if failing tests were just addressed
>On the other hand, one day we'll be in a situation where we'll want to
>look at tests that failed in the past but that are currently not
>failing so it'd be good to keep record of the old test in JIRA.
>I suppose I'd lean toward no special 'unit test' rule that precludes
>creating issues for failing tests mostly because if a new user, it'd
>be hard to explain the rule they'd be violating.
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)