From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Hanna Reitz <hreitz@redhat.com>, John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
qemu-block@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: Running 297 from GitLab CI
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2021 15:36:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211001203642.434ximxqj6h2o5np@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YVbFEDOgo4Onb15L@redhat.com>
On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 10:21:36AM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 30.09.2021 um 23:28 hat John Snow geschrieben:
> > Hiya, I was talking this over with Hanna in review to '[PATCH v3 00/16]
> > python/iotests: Run iotest linters during Python CI' [1] and I have some
> > doubt about what you'd personally like to see happen, here.
> >
> > In a nutshell, I split out 'linters.py' from 297 and keep all of the
> > iotest-bits in 297 and all of the generic "run the linters" bits in
> > linters.py, then I run linters.py from the GitLab python CI jobs.
> >
> > I did this so that iotest #297 would continue to work exactly as it had,
> > but trying to serve "two masters" in the form of two test suites means some
> > non-beautiful design decisions. Hanna suggested we just outright drop test
> > 297 to possibly improve the factoring of the tests.
> >
> > I don't want to do that unless you give it the go-ahead, though. I wanted
> > to hear your feelings on if we still want to keep 297 around or not.
>
> My basic requirement is that the checks are run somewhere in my local
> testing before I prepare a pull request. This means it could be done by
> iotests in any test that runs for -raw or -qcow2, or in 'make check'.
>
> So if you have a replacement somewhere in 'make check', dropping 297 is
> fine with me. If I have to run something entirely different, you may
> need to invest a bit more effort to convince me. ;-)
I'll echo that sentiment - if it's easy to automate, we can run it
under 'make check', and then we don't need the duplication of also
running it under iotests (especially since it isn't "really" an
iotest, so much as a test that makes the rest of the iotests more
consistent). If it's harder to automate, or requires me to run one
more thing, then keeping it in iotests for the short term is not too
drastic of a request, so that I don't accidentally skip it.
--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-01 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-30 21:28 Running 297 from GitLab CI John Snow
2021-10-01 8:21 ` Kevin Wolf
2021-10-01 19:24 ` John Snow
2021-10-01 20:36 ` Eric Blake [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=20211001203642.434ximxqj6h2o5np@redhat.com \
--to=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=hreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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).