FCP 20190401-ci_policy: CI policy

[Marcelo Araujo]

Em qui, 29 de ago de 2019 às 23:10, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> escreveu:

>
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 9:09 AM Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Em qui, 29 de ago de 2019 às 23:03, Kristof Provost <kp at freebsd.org>
>> escreveu:
>>
>> > On 29 Aug 2019, at 16:42, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 02:03:00PM +0200, Kristof Provost wrote:
>> > >> There are, somewhat regularly, commits which break functionality, or
>> > >> at
>> > >> the very least tests.
>> > >> The main objective of this policy proposal is to try to improve
>> > >> overall
>> > >> code quality by encouraging and empowering all committers to
>> > >> investigate
>> > >> and fix test failures.
>> > > But this policy does not encourage, if anything.
>> > > It gives a free ticket to revert, discouraging committers.
>> > >
>> > To provide a counterpoint here: my personal frustration right now is
>> > that I’ve spent a good bit of time adding tests for pf and fixing bugs
>> > for it, only to see the tests having to be disabled because of unrelated
>> > (to pf) changes in the network stack.
>> >
>> > Either through lack of visibility, or lack of time, or because people
>> > assume pf tests failures must by definition be the responsibility of the
>> > pf maintainer, these failures have not been investigated by anyone other
>> > than me, and I lack the time and subject matter expertise to fix them.
>> >
>> > I’m desperately afraid that if/when these bugs do get fixed we’re
>> > going to discover that other things have broken in the mean time, and
>> > the tests are still going to fail, for different reasons.
>> >
>> > These are bugs. They’re the best case scenario for bug reports even,
>> > because they come with a reproduction case built-in, and yet they’re
>> > still not getting fixed. This too is discouraging.
>> >
>> > I’m open to alternative proposals for how to address that problem, but
>> > I don’t think that “continue on as we always have” is the correct
>> >
>>
>> OK, because of PF that is sort of deprecated on FreeBSD and it need some
>> new rules to make it workable, everybody else need to abdicate to some new
>> rules. Yes, right you are!!!!
>>
>
> Let's take every opportunity to clarify community norms and turn it into a
> federal case. That's productive.
>

Yeah, that was my bad!!! Apologies for that if we still have time. Sorry
for that.


>
> Warner
>


-- 

-- 
Marcelo Araujo            (__)araujo at FreeBSD.org
\\\'',)http://www.FreeBSD.org <http://www.freebsd.org/>   \/  \ ^
Power To Server.         .\. /_)