On 06/10/2015 06:05 PM, Michael Still wrote:
> I think its fine for you to not want merge conflict messages from
> third party CI systems, but I do think we need to note that many of
> them do this now -- turbo hipster for example. If we turn off that
> message, then those CI systems will silently
Hi, Sean, I am the DB2 CI maintainer "yanfengxi". Thanks for reminding us
this problem. It is indeed annoying to see merge failures.
Now our team is trying to resolv this problem, by stopping to publish this
kind of failures. Before it's resolved, our DB2 CI will not publish result
to community.
A
Actually, and I think this was the point Sean was making, zuul
supports a different configuration for merge-failures which means CI
systems don't need to message back on merge-failures but can still
message back on real failures.
I'll look at changing turbo-hipsters reporting.
Cheers,
Josh
On Th
I think its fine for you to not want merge conflict messages from
third party CI systems, but I do think we need to note that many of
them do this now -- turbo hipster for example. If we turn off that
message, then those CI systems will silently fail and we will need to
be better at noticing that t
The IBM DB2 CI seems to be running a Zuul, and seems to be reporting
back on merge conflicts a lot in completely unhelpful ways -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/188148/
It seems like no 3rd party CI should be sending merge conflict messages
to gerrit. This is my formal complaint on that front, a
