From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812451381FA for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 18:02:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 09D84E096C; Fri, 9 May 2014 18:02:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57546E08FC for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 18:02:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (unknown [96.47.226.20]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8444133F077 for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 18:02:38 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <536D183A.1020405@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 18:02:34 +0000 From: hasufell Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call For Agenda Items - 13 May 2014 References: <536CE132.1070305@gentoo.org> <20140509172925.29e3f212@gentoo.org> <536D13CF.2000403@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <536D13CF.2000403@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 536a4c37-54ff-4e8b-b53b-332c3318711d X-Archives-Hash: acbb60c8f934385afda4bcb8e4415e4c hasufell: > I'll give it to this list outright. > > I have problems believing in QA competence when I read comments like these: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473#c14 > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473#c17 > blocked or not, I just post them here, because there is nothing to hide: ============== Comment 14 Chris Reffett Depends on whether you consider build failures and stuff like that to be QA's problem. Further depends on getting hardware--I for one don't exactly have boxes lying around which have nothing better to do than build packages all day. We can discuss this at the next meeting, but I wouldn't suggest getting your hopes up. ============== Comment 15 Julian Ospald (hasufell) (In reply to Chris Reffett from comment #14) I am not really sure if I understand that reasoning. Testing is the very center of Quality Assurance (that's what I learned... correct me if I am wrong). Gentoo as a distribution ships the portage tree. If no one tests the tree on a global basis (arch testers don't), then there is not much QA overall. The quality of our tree inherently depends on the compileability of it's packages. Further, there are a lot of use cases where a developer might want/need to request a tinderbox run with a certain package unmasked, a certain eclass changed etc. In the end, it directly affects the user. ============== Comment 16 Rick Farina (Zero_Chaos) I have a tinderbox class system. I build 4400 packages a day, give or take. Problem is, it's the same 4400 packages, and bug reports are entirely non-automated. If you would like to help setup something better, here I am. ============== Comment 17 Tom Wijsman (In reply to Rick Farina (Zero_Chaos) from comment #16) > I have a tinderbox class system. I build 4400 packages a day, give or take. > Problem is, it's the same 4400 packages, and bug reports are entirely > non-automated. If you would like to help setup something better, here I am. We should fix bugs first before adding more of them; reviving Tinderbox would be nice for when we run out of bugs, but that's definitely not the case yet today. Consider to mark this RESOLVED LATER again... ============== Comment 18 Julian Ospald (hasufell) (In reply to Tom Wijsman (TomWij) from comment #17) > (In reply to Rick Farina (Zero_Chaos) from comment #16) >> I have a tinderbox class system. I build 4400 packages a day, give or take. >> Problem is, it's the same 4400 packages, and bug reports are entirely >> non-automated. If you would like to help setup something better, here I am. > > We should fix bugs first before adding more of them; reviving Tinderbox > would be nice for when we run out of bugs, but that's definitely not the > case yet today. > > Consider to mark this RESOLVED LATER again... lolwat? ============== Comment 19 Alexander Berntsen (bernalex) (In reply to Tom Wijsman (TomWij) from comment #17) > We should fix bugs first before adding more of them; reviving Tinderbox > would be nice for when we run out of bugs, but that's definitely not the > case yet today. Should we replace enter_bug.cgi with a website saying "sorry, we have enough bugs for now" as well?