Hi, I agree, and only vote +1 myself, but I don’t agree on mandating it. If someone has invested enough in their CI to be confident, we just supply rope.
Thanks, doug > On Jun 25, 2015, at 8:08 AM, John Davidge (jodavidg) <jodav...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Recent neutron third party CI issues have got me thinking again about a topic > which we discussed in Vancouver: > > Should any Third Party CI have voting rights for neutron patches in gerrit? > > I’d like to suggest that they shouldn’t. > > A -1 from a third party CI tool can often be an indication that the CI tool > itself or the third party plugin is broken, rather than there being issues > with the patch under review. I don’t think there are many cases where a third > party CI tool has caught a genuine issue that Jenkins has missed. With the > current voting rights these CI tools cause a lot of noise when they > experience problems. > > I’m not suggesting that the results of these tests be removed from the page > altogether - there are some cases where their results are useful to the patch > author/reviewer - but removing voting rights (or at least -1 rights) would > save a patch from a –1 that might not be particularly meaningful. > > Thoughts? > > John > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
