Open Stack

Excerpts from Monty Taylor's message of 2013-11-25 06:52:02 -0800:
> 
> On 11/25/2013 04:23 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> > Excerpts from Joe Gordon's message of 2013-11-24 21:00:58 -0800:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> TL;DR Last week the gate got wedged on nondeterministic failures. Unwedging
> >> the gate required drastic actions to fix bugs.
> >>
> >>
> > <snip>
> > 
> > (great write-up, thank you for the details, and thank you for fixing
> > it!)
> > 
> >>
> >> Now that we have the gate back into working order, we are working on the
> >> next steps to prevent this from happening again.  The two most immediate
> >> changes are:
> >>
> >>    - Doing a better job of triaging gate bugs  (
> >>    http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/020048.html
> >>     ).
> >>
> >>
> >>    - In the next few days we will remove  'reverify no bug' (although you
> >>    will still be able to run 'reverify bug x'.
> >>
> > 
> > I am curious, why not also disable 'recheck no bug'?
> 
> recheck no bug still has a host of valid use cases. Often times I use it
> when I upload a patch, it fails because of a thing somewhere else, we
> fix that, and I need to recheck the patch because it should work now.
> 
> It's also not nearly as dangerous as reverify no bug.
> 

"...somewhere else, we fix that..." -- Would it be useful to track that
in a bug? Would that help elastic-recheck work better if all the problems
caused by a bug elsewhere were reported as bugs?