Open Stack

On 22 October 2015 at 10:58, Thomas Herve <therve at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> You've seen me complain about people doing blank rechecks in Gerrit on IRC,
> and it seems it had little to no effect. So here I am trying to spread the
> word here. I'll try to stay calm.
>
> I'm seeing way too many rechecks on heat patches. It's not epidemic, but
> it's still enough to make me sad.
>
> First, it makes me sad as a developer. I don't know if it's just me, but one
> of the reason I code is curiosity, and debugging a gate failure is a great
> way to learn, pierce through the layers, and improve the situation.
>
> It then makes me sad as a team member. By doing a recheck you're basically
> implying that you don't care about the failure, and surely someone will care
> at some point. Except, the information will be lost, and we may have 100
> builds before that happen again, when a release already happened, and we
> have to backport it. Working early means working less.
>
> And finally, it makes me sad for the infra team. Doing a recheck is
> disrespecting all the work they're doing to create a reliable environment to
> run our tests. Sure, sometimes the environment is the reason the failure
> happens, but then it's even more important to give feedback about it. They
> provide a great deal of logs, we can use logstach to find patterns, the
> least we can do is trying. We're also using resources that other projects
> could be using. As much as we'd like to believe it, the cloud doesn't have
> free infinite resources.
>
> Recently, I've seen many cases where rechecks were made whereas:
> 1) The heat branch was broken. Generally for some external reason (a
> dependency updated), doing a recheck is a pure waste of resources until that
> failure is fixed. Most of the time, we say something on IRC when it's the
> case. We also try to open a bug, so looking at launchpad can show something.
> 2) THE PATCH WAS ACTUALLY BROKEN. And there I'm not sad anymore I'm
> particularly angry. It basically means that you didn't look at all at the
> build results, and just mindlessly typed rechecks hoping that some fairy
> will fix your broken code. Frankly, that makes want to go on a -2 rampage.
> ESPECIALLY where a core is doing it.
>
> To close, I'll try to provide a solution. I know we all have our agenda,
> debugging gate failures takes some time that you may not have, and obviously
> "my patch is fine it's not my fault" (who cares, that's what being in a team
> means). Still, I'd like everyone to look at the test failures, look if the
> patch is not the problem, and if not open a bug [1] mentioning the test
> name, pasting the traceback in the description, and linking the build
> result. Then do recheck bug #xyz. That's it. It shouldn't take you more than
> 3 minutes, and at least we didn't lose the information.
>
> Thanks for reading that far and sorry for the length,
>
>
> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+filebug
>
> --
> Thomas
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

Thomas,

Thank you for the pay attention on this issue.
I know that you constantly ask about it, especially core-team members :)
I appreciate it, because it's really helpful and more over important.

Unfortunately new approach with empty reverify made people more lazy.
I think, that we should follow your recommendation, because:
 - it will help fix our gate faster
 - makes our develop process more clear and useful for new comers

my +2 for this initiative.
Everybody please spent your 2-3 minutes to make our work better!

-- 
Regards,
Sergey.