On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Jamie Strandboge <ja...@canonical.com> wrote:
> In other words, while I agree that disabling a test is not the first > choice and > almost never the correct permanent choice, a carefully thought out > decision may > show it to be the right temporary choice. Disabling this test allows us to > push > a package that suffers from the same sqlite3 regression as what is > currently in > the archive, yet it fixes an issue that is potentially blocking image > promotion. > I get that. You have two bugs, and you can't fix them both at the same time. You will have to ignore one. In my opinion, a saner process would be to fix the one that already has a test. Then write a test for the other one, and then fix it. Of course, not everybody will agree to this in all the cases, but we need a good reason to go the other way. > To make sure this is not lost, I have filed a bug: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sqlite3/+bug/1335281 > > I created two tasks: one for sqlite3 (and assigned to doko per Steve's > guidance > in this thread) and one for mediascanner2 to reenable the test (and > assigned to > Jussi). I added the 'rtm14' tag. > Thanks. I've made a list of bugs that need to be checked regularly, here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/removed-tests-u Feel free to contribute to the definition of the process on the whiteboard. pura vida
-- 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
