I vote to is also with current/existing process (not running for every PR).
We can create an on-request prechecking running on windows machine like what we
did for running some regression tests, if someone really need to run it on
windows (Actually, I'd love to have this tool)
On 6/25/20, 1:52 PM, "Anilkumar Gingade" <aging...@vmware.com> wrote:
Looking at the cost and value derived; My vote is with current/existing
process (not running for every PR).
On 6/25/20, 11:39 AM, "Mark Hanson" <mhan...@pivotal.io> wrote:
I support adding it in, but I think the time wasted is less than you
think. I think for me the most important thing is finding an issue when it is
put in.
I think the current way is actually faster and more efficient, because
every PR doesn’t have to wait the 4 hours and in reality the number is of
windows failures is lower than the number of linux failures.
Just a thought.
Thanks,
Mark
> On Jun 25, 2020, at 11:30 AM, Jianxia Chen <jche...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> +1 to add Windows tests to the PR pipeline. It may take longer time
to run
> (up to 4 hours). But consider the time wasted on reverting, fixing and
> resubmitting, if there is a failure after merging to the develop
branch. It
> is better to add the Windows tests to the PR pipeline. We can
reevaluate
> and optimize the pipeline if the long running time is truly a concern.
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 9:29 AM Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I merged some new AcceptanceTests to develop after having my PR go
GREEN.
>> But now these tests are failing in Windows.
>>
>> I'd like to propose that we add the Windows jobs to our PR checks if
we
>> plan to keep testing on Windows in CI.
>>
>> Please vote or discuss.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kirk
>>
