On Thu, May 19, 2022, 4:25 AM Daniel P. Berrangé
wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 09:54:56AM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 18.05.2022 um 20:21 hat John Snow geschrieben:
> > > To wire it up to "make check" by *default*, I believe I need to expand
> the
> > > configure script to poll for certain
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 09:54:56AM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 18.05.2022 um 20:21 hat John Snow geschrieben:
> > To wire it up to "make check" by *default*, I believe I need to expand the
> > configure script to poll for certain requisites and then create some
> > wrapper script of some kind tha
Am 18.05.2022 um 20:21 hat John Snow geschrieben:
> To wire it up to "make check" by *default*, I believe I need to expand the
> configure script to poll for certain requisites and then create some
> wrapper script of some kind that only engages the python tests if the
> requisites were met ... and
On Wed, May 18, 2022, 12:37 PM Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 18.05.2022 um 01:28 hat John Snow geschrieben:
> > Hi Kevin,
> >
> > I remember that you wanted some minimum Niceness threshold in order to
> > agree to me removing iotest 297.
> >
> > I've already moved it onto GitLab CI in the form of the
>
Am 18.05.2022 um 01:28 hat John Snow geschrieben:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> I remember that you wanted some minimum Niceness threshold in order to
> agree to me removing iotest 297.
>
> I've already moved it onto GitLab CI in the form of the
> check-python-pipenv job, but I recall you wanted to be able to
Hi Kevin,
I remember that you wanted some minimum Niceness threshold in order to
agree to me removing iotest 297.
I've already moved it onto GitLab CI in the form of the
check-python-pipenv job, but I recall you wanted to be able to run it
locally as well before agreeing to axe 297. I remember th
