On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 01:16:58PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 11:59 AM, Ademar Reis wrote:
>
> >>I expect QEMU to grow tests for anything that involves launching
> >>QEMU directly. Where I would not see QEMU growing tests for is
> >>t
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 03:24:15PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 03:02 PM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 01:16:58PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>On 03/08/2012 11:59 AM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> &
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 04:46:09PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 08.03.2012 15:56, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
> >> I particularly agreed with basically everything you said on that
> >> discussion regarding test simplification (I had just joined the
> >> team back then). To me, autotest has been focus
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:48:33AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 08:01 AM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
> >On 03/08/2012 10:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >
> >>>Virt/qemu tests: Minimal guest images
> >>>-
> >>>
> >>>In order to make developm
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 07:36:11AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/07/2012 10:00 PM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
> >Hi guys. For a while we have been discussing ways to make the virtualization
> >tests written on top of autotest useful for development level testing.
> >
> >One of our main
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:54:31AM +, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues
> > wrote:
> >> One of our main goals is to provide useful tools for the qemu community,
> >> since we have a go
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:56:23AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 08:49 AM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 07:36:11AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>On 03/07/2012 10:00 PM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
> >>>Virt/qe
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 09:14:02AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 09:07 AM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:56:23AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>On 03/08/2012 08:49 AM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 07:36:11A
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:03:54AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 10:05 AM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 09:14:02AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>On 03/08/2012 09:07 AM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:56:23A
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 09:17:42AM -0300, Ademar Reis wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:54:31AM +, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues
> > > wrote:
>
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 10:36:42AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 10:34 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> >Am 08.03.2012 17:10, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
> >>>And, of course:
> >>>[qemu]$ test-runner --remote=autotest.qemu.org tests.d/block
> >>
> >>I don't understand what this would do.
> >
>
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 05:21:44PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 04:24 PM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 03:24:15PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>On 03/08/2012 03:02 PM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 01:16:58P
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:07:27PM -0300, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
> On 03/08/2012 06:24 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>
> >>Cons:
> >>- Lot of code will be duplicated to cover the main code paths:
> >>writting tests will require writting/supporting considerable
> >>ammount of code (that alr
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 12:59:16AM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 08.03.2012 16:00, schrieb Ademar Reis:
> > Fully agree, please check my previous email with the plans for
> > the new architecture of autotest.
> [...]
> > Fully agree, please check our p
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 09:41:05AM +, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 05:21:44PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >> On 03/08/2012 04:24 PM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >> >On Thu, Mar 08, 201
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 08:13:45AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/09/2012 06:48 AM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
>
> Look at how this discussion started. We've been discussing testing
> on qemu-devel at excruciating length and detail and have finally
> come to something of a consensus.
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 02:54:23PM +, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 09:41:05AM +, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Ademar Reis wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Ma
Patches are close to trivial, but anyway, I reviewed and tested
them.
Reviewed-by: Ademar Reis
--
Ademar Reis
Red Hat
^[:wq!
e shouldn't have orphan
runners).
* Have as many tests as possible in the git repo: maintained,
reviewed and run (outside of a CI) by people who care about them.
I absolutely agree with you that maintainers and developers should
care and our goal should be a gating CI. The question is how to
create a strategy and a plan to get there. Forcing people to care
rarely works.
Thanks.
- Ademar
--
Ademar Reis Jr
Red Hat
^[:wq!
19 matches
Mail list logo
