From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OLcxh-00035p-7o for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:06:01 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 65CBBE0B93; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 14:05:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ABC0E0B7F for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 14:05:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from marsupilami.localnet (84-238-114-252.u.parknet.dk [84.238.114.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B031B4003 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 14:05:48 +0000 (UTC) From: Thilo Bangert To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue" Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:05:57 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.33.5; KDE/4.4.3; i686; ; ) References: <4C0917B1.8080307@gentoo.org> <201006071210.07109.bangert@gentoo.org> <20100607140250.2d8071e2@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: <20100607140250.2d8071e2@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> Organization: Gentoo Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1323578.su0GudSPql"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201006071606.00696.bangert@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 18c874f5-56b7-4824-9c91-540d4496d256 X-Archives-Hash: 73c3792befad2383b8db9ab16ddbf5c9 --nextPart1323578.su0GudSPql Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable you make valid points regarding the overall improvement of the handling of= =20 test suites. I am not opposed to something like that being done... it still seems like there is agreement around the fact that something=20 needs to be done about src_test. currently you cant run a system which=20 generally enables this phase. however, the fact that different people see different problems, should not= =20 stop us of from solving any problem. so as a small incremental step, the=20 method of RESTRICTing failing tests is acceptable despite the negative=20 consquences you mention. thanks kind regards Thilo --nextPart1323578.su0GudSPql Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkwM/MgACgkQxRElEoA5AnfnMwCgj1HwD/xLFJOsIR+DFtfWoqVd B1wAoMJ986AZXzGCyb/bqIijHR9k03D8 =hAmV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1323578.su0GudSPql--