Still +1 with the amendment On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 at 19:57, C. Scott Andreas <sc...@paradoxica.net> wrote:
> +1nb, with and without the amendment. > > Reason for mentioning without: I see the ability to cut a release to > address an urgent security or data loss issue as one of the strongest > arguments for maintaining green CI as a resting state so we are ready in > the event of an emergency. > > Test results that we can trust help us ship urgent fixes safely. If I were > a user and had an urgent need to ramp a new build (e.g., if Apache > Cassandra were affected by log4j), I would be very concerned about a > fleet-wide deploy of a distributed database release with failing tests. > > But in both cases, +1nb. :) > > – Scott > > On Jan 12, 2022, at 11:22 AM, David Capwell <dcapw...@apple.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > On Jan 12, 2022, at 8:39 AM, Joseph Lynch <joe.e.ly...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 3:25 AM Berenguer Blasi > <berenguerbl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > jenkins CI was at 2/3 flakies consistently post 4.0 release. > > > That is really impressive and I absolutely don't mean to downplay that > achievement. > > Then things broke and we've been working hard to get back to the 2/3 > flakies. Most > current failures imo are timeuuid C17133 or early termination of process > C17140 related afaik. So getting back to the 2/3 'impossible' flakies > should be doable and a reasonable target (famous last words...). My 2cts. > > > I really appreciate all the work folks have been doing to get the > project to green, and I support the parts of the proposal that try to > formalize methods to try to keep us there. I am only objecting to #2 > in the proposal where we have a non-negotiable gate on tests before a > release. > > -Joey > > >
