git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Roberto Tyley <roberto.tyley@gmail.com>,
	Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, janx@linux.com,
	Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] t7300: mark test with SANITY
Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 17:35:56 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160503213556.GA25133@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqk2jalu03.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 02:19:24PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > Maybe. I admit to not really using the Travis tests myself, as they are
> > way too slow and cumbersome to debug compared to just running "make
> > test".  The primary value to me of centralized CI is:
> >
> >   1. _If_ people are looking at PRs on GitHub, the test status is shown
> >      right there in the PR, without a reviewer having to wonder whether
> >      the submitter ran "make test". But since I don't ever look at PRs
> >      for Git, that's not helpful.
> 
> What I was hoping was that bots like SubmitGit could look at that
> status.

Yeah, I think that would be pretty trivial to do. It's already
interacting with GitHub's API, and I think there's a simple call to
query the test status (so it wouldn't even require SubmitGit talking to
Travis directly).

I don't think that really solves the problem overall, though. SubmitGit
is still a minority of patch submissions (and I wouldn't expect that to
change, but maybe I'm just a curmudgeon).

-Peff

      reply	other threads:[~2016-05-03 21:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-05-03 18:54 [PATCH] t7300: mark test with SANITY Stefan Beller
2016-05-03 19:04 ` Jeff King
2016-05-03 19:09   ` Junio C Hamano
2016-05-03 19:28   ` Junio C Hamano
2016-05-03 21:15     ` Jeff King
2016-05-03 21:19       ` Junio C Hamano
2016-05-03 21:35         ` Jeff King [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160503213556.GA25133@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=janx@linux.com \
    --cc=larsxschneider@gmail.com \
    --cc=roberto.tyley@gmail.com \
    --cc=sbeller@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).