+1 for one email.
> On Aug 16, 2016, at 7:45 AM, Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > > Assuming we're single digit failures combined between the two, I think a > single test failure email would be manageable. > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Joel Knighton <joel.knigh...@datastax.com> > wrote: > >> =================================================== >> testall: 1 failure >> org.apache.cassandra.io.compress >> .CompressedRandomAccessReaderTest.testDataCorruptionDetection >> New flaky failure. I've opened CASSANDRA-12465 and assigned >> myself. >> >> =================================================== >> dtest: All passed! >> >> =================================================== >> novnode: All passed! >> >> =================================================== >> upgrade: 3 failures >> upgrade_tests.cql_tests >> .TestCQLNodes2RF1_Upgrade_current_3_0_x_To_indev_3_x >> .map_keys_indexing_test >> CASSANDRA-12192. Tyler Hobbs as assignee. They have identified >> the cause and proposed a test fix. They are also investigating a C* >> change here to improve robustness. >> upgrade_tests.cql_tests >> .TestCQLNodes3RF3_Upgrade_current_3_x_To_indev_3_x >> .map_keys_indexing_test >> Same as above. >> upgrade_tests.paging_test >> .TestPagingDataNodes2RF1_Upgrade_current_2_2_x_To_indev_3_x >> .static_columns_paging_test >> Potentially CASSANDRA-11195, which is open with no clear >> progress. I'll follow up with those on that issue tomorrow and see if >> they agree that this is the same problem. >> >> =================================================== >> Overall, the testing situation continues to look better. The massive >> upgrade failures seem to have subsided, so we can continue to target >> individual failures. >> >> Since the 3.9 tests are getting to a manageable level, we should focus >> on managing test failures on trunk as well. I will soon start tracking >> these failures, as well as failures on the large dtest runs, which consist >> of tests that have been segmented off due to increased cluster size. >> >> On months that we're maintaining a 3.x bugfix branch as well as trunk, >> is there any preference toward a single email or a separate email for >> each branch? Any other feedback is welcome, as always. >>
