I'll repeat again, lint is fixable-- people just need to fix their test code to pass those tests. I'm thinking we should just remove the broader list, and just email the people that break the tests going forward. This way we can still (hopefully) clean them up without spamming everyone to death.
TSQA has docs both within the tests themselves (examples) as well as docs in the trafficserver-qa repository (with examples). I'd be more than happy to make changes/additions to documentation if something is missing :) On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Phil Sorber <sor...@apache.org> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:04 AM Thomas Jackson <jacksontj...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Tsqa-lint is intended to pass, but if no one ever looks at the mails then > > they never get better. > > On Sep 18, 2015 6:34 PM, "Leif Hedstrom" <zw...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sep 18, 2015, at 3:32 PM, Thomas Jackson <jackso...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > *TL;DR: if you make a commit, and the tests fail-- there is a high > > > > probability that your code change broke something. Please take the > time > > > to > > > > figure out if the bug was you or not, and if it isn't let someone > > know-- > > > > the community can help. TSQA is back on, but tsqa-lint is off for > now.* > > > > > > > > I can understand some of the complaints about tsqa-lint, but the test > > is > > > > simply a lint check of the test code. If we want to remove that I'm > > okay > > > > with it, but the intent is to make sure your tests are well formatted > > (we > > > > already do similar things for the rest of the codebase, so we have > > > > precedent). > > > > > > > > > Btw, if tsqa-lint is expected to fail, we should remove it IMO. > > > > > > — Leif > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for fixing it. I'm +1 on removing lint if it's not fixable. If it > was never right, it shouldn't have been mailing people. Also, it appears > that was my commit that broke it, but I had no idea. I guess it just seems > to me like it was broken in the beginning and so I ignored the static of > the emails and so if it was ever working correctly I didn't notice. > > I'm all for more testing. I think we should make sure that everyone knows > how to run it and fix it though. We did something similar when we put > clang-analyzer into Jenkins. It didn't break the build until we had > everything cleared up. Then we made it a dependency and so emails mean > something. > > So if we can leave lint emails off until it is passing (or removed) and we > can depend on TSQA not being noise then I am good with it being a proper > build dependency going forward. > > Are there any docs on TSQA? Perhaps we should create a wiki page for it? > > Thanks. >
