Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] GitLab CI: crude mapping of PMM's scripts to jobs

[Cleber Rosa <crosa@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1491 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 11:08:15AM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote:
> 
> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > On 03/02/2020 04.23, Cleber Rosa wrote:
> >> This is a crude and straightforward mapping of Peter's
> >> "remake-merge-builds" and "pull-buildtest" scripts.
> <snip>
> >
> > Thanks for doing this! The patch looks basically fine to me, but some
> > comments below...
> >
> <snip>
> >
> > Question to Peter/Alex/Stefan/Howevermergespullreqsinthefuture:
> >
> > Should the above jobs really be skipped for pull requests, or would it
> > be ok to include them there, too? (in the latter case, the above changes
> > could just be dropped)
> 
> I think there is certainly value in having different stages of testing.
> At least initially we'll want to match as closely to the current system

This would be my preferred approach too.  One type of change at a time
makes me feel much cosier :)

> and then I imagine as we go on there will be trade-offs to be made in
> how much is gating PRs and how much is retroactive and catches things
> that slip through. While more testing is good we can't exponentially
> grow what is reasonable to test for on all PRs.
>

Like I said elsewhere, if we have no constraints, we could test
everything everywhere.  I'm not that naive, and it should be obvious
that what I mean is that we can progressevely grow in coverage, until
we hit those limits.

Thanks,
- Cleber.

> <snip>
> 
> -- 
> Alex Bennée
> 

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]