From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
To: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, ci@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: Apply Patchseries Script
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 08:05:42 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f7ty1gqo63t.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJvnSUCL8et+rBR_3NtNmiQY_EtYataiP9Jgpt74cvAr=y_vWw@mail.gmail.com> (Patrick Robb's message of "Wed, 27 Sep 2023 20:16:22 -0400")
Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 4:22 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>
> 27/09/2023 18:31, Patrick Robb:
>
> > 2. Do not apply and run if the series is an RFC series
>
> Not sure about this requirement.
> What is the problem in running tests on RFC?
>
> I see that currently ovsrobot and UNH Lab have rules saying don't test on RFC series, and Loongson and Intel do test on
> RFC series. I'm guessing the thinking was something like "RFC patches are at least one stage away from merge, and
> probably do not represent the final state of the patch, so CI testing is not very valuable." On the other hand, I'm sure in
> many cases getting that early feedback, even for an RFC, is helpful to developers. I'll bring it up in the CI testing
> meeting tomorrow and see if any of the CI testing people have an opinion. Anyways, I think all labs should have the
> same policy, be it testing or not testing on RFC patches.
We do currently skip running RFCs as well. IIRC they were eating into
our timing budget on Travis, and we never bothered to re-evaluate after
the switch to github actions. I think it would be good to discuss it.
> Thanks for the feedback.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-28 12:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-27 16:31 Patrick Robb
2023-09-27 20:22 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-09-28 0:16 ` Patrick Robb
2023-09-28 12:05 ` Aaron Conole [this message]
2023-09-28 12:31 ` David Marchand
2023-09-28 12:06 ` Aaron Conole
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f7ty1gqo63t.fsf@redhat.com \
--to=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=ci@dpdk.org \
--cc=probb@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).