Hi, On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Didier Roche <didro...@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> As we are really close to our target of 100% of tests reliably passing and > there is not anymore any known "can't launch app" blockers, it's time to > look at getting all flaky tests disabled or fixed. It's completely > reachable to get that green for Thursday I guess. If you can't fix a test > that is flaky, the test is useless, so please disable it: it's just > bringing noise to people trying to release an image. This sentence scares me. Please don't disable tests that are failing without first: * Doing some investigation into *why* they're failing. * If you're still stuck, talk to someone on the TnT team [1], we're here to help you fix this sort of problem. * If, after all they you still cannot solve the problem, at least file a bug against your project that you need to re-add that test case at some point in the future. I'm sure nobody is suggesting this, but to my ear this sounds awfully close to "we're going to disable failing tests because we can't be bothered to fix them". Again, I'm not suggesting that anyone has this attitude, but it's important that our language (especially on a public mailing list) reflects our intention. Cheers, [1] The TnT team (Tools and Trust) are: Thomi Richards (thomi), Max Brustkern (nuclearbob), Corey Goldberg (cgoldberg) and Chris Lee (veebers). You can find us on #ubuntu-qa on irc.freenode.net. -- Thomi Richards thomi.richa...@canonical.com
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
