> On 09 Feb 2017, at 18:42, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
> On quarta-feira, 8 de fevereiro de 2017 09:46:36 PST Lars Knoll wrote:
>> The second larger issue are flaky tests, ie. tests that fail randomly from
>> time to time. These tests are causing huge issues in CI, and especially
>> make qt5.git i
On quarta-feira, 8 de fevereiro de 2017 09:46:36 PST Lars Knoll wrote:
> The second larger issue are flaky tests, ie. tests that fail randomly from
> time to time. These tests are causing huge issues in CI, and especially
> make qt5.git integrations that are required for releasing and to get
> upda
> On 09 Feb 2017, at 13:11, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 01:11:14PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote:
>> Still: add to dev, too?
>>
> no. that's an equivalent of a cherry-pick, and we don't do that.
Agree. If you need it in dev as well, we should simply do the required merge.
L
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 01:11:14PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote:
> Still: add to dev, too?
>
no. that's an equivalent of a cherry-pick, and we don't do that.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/d
On Thursday 09 February 2017 13:04:41 Marc Mutz wrote:
> On Thursday 09 February 2017 12:40:35 Lars Knoll wrote:
> [...]
>
> > I’d say we push the branch we saw it failing on (but please feel free to
> > do a quick check whether you can find it failing in 5.8 as well before
> > pushing). That migh
d you mean another class perhaps?
Simon
From: Development on
behalf of Marc Mutz
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 1:04:41 PM
To: Qt development mailing list
Subject: Re: [Development] CI stability
On Thursday 09 February 2017 12:40:35 Lars Knoll wrote:
[...]
&g
On Thursday 09 February 2017 12:40:35 Lars Knoll wrote:
[...]
> I’d say we push the branch we saw it failing on (but please feel free to do
> a quick check whether you can find it failing in 5.8 as well before
> pushing). That might imply that we get multiple changes, but we won’t
> lower our test
> On 09 Feb 2017, at 11:52, Marc Mutz wrote:
>
> Hi Lars,
>
> On Wednesday 08 February 2017 10:46:36 Lars Knoll wrote:
>> Anybody who identifies a flaky test (ie. a test that is randomly failing in
>> CI), can blacklist that test; under one condition. He needs to at the same
>> time create a P0
Hi Lars,
On Wednesday 08 February 2017 10:46:36 Lars Knoll wrote:
> Anybody who identifies a flaky test (ie. a test that is randomly failing in
> CI), can blacklist that test; under one condition. He needs to at the same
> time create a P0 bug report about it. Please also add the labels
> ‘autotes
Hi everybody,
I guess all of you know the frustration about not getting your change in
because an unrelated autotest failed, or due to changes in other modules
breaking things for you.
After quite a few discussions, we’ve now decided that we will try to tackle
this and hopefully make the whole
10 matches
Mail list logo
