On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 10:11:09AM +0200, David Caro wrote:
On 05/05, Max Kovgan wrote:
hi, Dan. makes sense to me to focus on 2 use cases: - pre-commit hook running everything jenkins is running - locally Maybe pre-push instead, that will leverage a bit the local work - pros: - nearly identical checks/tests jenkins would running - doesn't care about IDE/editor - cons: - slower - can be annoying to commit (locally) broken code for later squashing
If something is too anoying to be run (such as blocking every patch for 3 minute unit tests, when the poor developer only wants to post his patch and go home) - developer would find a way to skip it.
- editor/IDE marriage with tests/checks running - pros: - dev has full control over what runs in checks/tests - allows to commit "dirty" commit - shorter ==> quicker than the quickest jenkins option - cons: - depends on IDE/editor support - less checks/tests => higher risk
+1. It boils down to developer and maintainer prudence. I have such a plugin in my ViM for static testing; Ido (and everyone else) should have one, too. I'm less sure about auto-running `make check` at rundom points in time.
I did both with: intelliJ/PyCharm and vim, almost 100% sure PyDev allows this.
either allows ease of running tests - in 1st case upon git commit, in the latter - via a button/shortcut in the devtool. I can help with setting up either to an early adopter. Then give it a week or two to get some feedback later how well it goes.
Besides, we're also trying to speedup jenkins response all the time
I would not mind to BLOCK merging before jenkins hook has responded - assuming that I (as a branch maintainer) can remove the jenkins reviewer from gerrit. There could be emenrgencies that cannot wait for the response. And of course, as a maintainer, I must be able to override the decision of the robot (by removing it from the reviewer list).