Just to add more flavor to my previous response... I currently have a PR open that modified a method signature that touched a few WAN tests. It was a simple change, removing an unused parameter. StressNewTest failed and I had to spend another day figuring out 10 or so different failures. A waste of time? Maybe.. At first, I wasn't going to continue, but after trying a few things, it looks like the tests installed a listener that was hampering other tests. At the end (soon once it gets reviewed/merged), we end up with a Green PR and hopefully have unblocked others on these specific tests in the future.
On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 2:58 PM Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote: > I feel the frustration at times, but I do also think the ci/pipelines are > improving, breaking less often. I'm ok with the way things are for the > moment > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 1:47 PM Owen Nichols <onich...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> In October we agreed to require at least 1 reviewer and 4 passing PR >> checks before a PR can be merged. Now that we’re tried it for a few >> months, do we like it? >> >> I saw some strong opinions on the dev list recently: >> >> > Changes to the infrastructure to flat out prevent things that should be >> self policing is annoying. This PR review lock we have had already cost us >> valuable time waiting for PR pipelines to pass that have no relevance to >> the commit, like CI work. I hate to see process enforced that keeps us from >> getting work done when necessary. >> >> >> and >> >> > I think we're getting more and more bureaucratic in our process and >> that it stifles productivity. I was recently forced to spend three days >> fixing tests in which I had changed an import statement before they would >> pass stress testing. I'm glad the tests now pass reliably but I was very >> frustrated by the process. >> >> >> Just wondering if others feel the same way. Is it time to make some >> changes? >> >> -Owen > >
