your patch https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/40346/ broke oVirt vdsm jobs

[Dan Kenigsberg]

On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 05:18:00PM +0200, David Caro wrote:
> On 05/05, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> > 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).
> 
> I'm actually working on adding a new flag 'Continuous Integration' that can
> only be set by maintainers and the ci bot, and that requires +1 to merge (where
> -1 does not block).
> 
> Does that make sense to you? (that way you can't rebase and merge before ci
> runs and -1, it's easier to handle permissions, it's easier to spot on the ui,
> is clearer it's purpose and does not overload another flag).

Yes, it does!