<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/02/2018 03:20 PM, Brian Bouterse
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAAcvrTHGcHdperAGjySYu3jb=5JM-=wUf6Yy0B4MSS89s+yhxA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>I had neglected to write up the temporary enable/disable
part of the issue, so I just updated it here: <a
href="https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3379"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3379</a><br>
<br>
</div>
In short, one of the pulp org owners (ipanova, ttereshc,
rchan, jortel, bmbouter) can temporarily enable/disable
required checks. This issue would also add this process to
both the pulp2 and pulp3 docs.<br>
<br>
</div>
What do you all think about an idea like this?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
+1<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAAcvrTHGcHdperAGjySYu3jb=5JM-=wUf6Yy0B4MSS89s+yhxA@mail.gmail.com">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Brian
Bouterse <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:bbouters@redhat.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">bbouters@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">+1 to enabling checks for the 'pulp' and
'pulp_file' repos in Github with the ability to
temporarily disable them. I wrote up this issue here to do
that: <a href="https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3379"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://pulp.plan.io/issues/<wbr>3379</a><br>
<div><br>
I think we should enable these because we have a
human-enforced policy that expects failed checks to not
be merged, but in practice code that is merged breaks
things that quality checks also identified. I think Pulp
would benefit from a stronger pre-merge enforcement of
our existing checks. In the case where our quality
checks are failing, I'm hoping we can focus on fixing
them before continuing on with the merge in all but
exceptional cases.<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:55
PM, Daniel Alley <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:dalley@redhat.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">dalley@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>+0 on required github-enforcement, +1 to
a strict human-enforced policy about tests
passing for PR merges<br>
<br>
</div>
Reason being, an issue has occurred which
would block valid PRs twice within the last
month. The first being the test certs
expiring on January 25th, the second being
when we switched the PR unittest runners over
to new versions of Fedora this morning.<br>
<br>
</div>
I'm not against the idea by any means, I'm just
not entirely convinced that the exceptions
requiring intervention will be very infrequent,
and I can imagine it leading to a fair amount of
frustration.<br>
</div>
<div class="m_-3002604935963821599HOEnZb">
<div class="m_-3002604935963821599h5">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 15,
2018 at 7:34 PM, David Davis <span
dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:daviddavis@redhat.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">daviddavis@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">+1 to enabling the checks
for the core pulp repos in Github. The
only concern I have is that perhaps
something happens outside of our
control (e.g. Travis goes down) and we
can’t merge PRs. In those cases
though, we can temporarily disable
checks.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><span
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515HOEnZb"><font
color="#888888"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515m_1667988254304518129gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>David<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</font></span>
<div>
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515h5">
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu,
Feb 15, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Brian
Bouterse <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:bbouters@redhat.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">bbouters@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I want to adjust my
proposal to only be for
core, and not a
requirement for any
plugin. I think the plugin
policy is something the
committers should decide
along with their users. I
overall believe enabling
these kinds of checks is a
good idea so I encourage
plugins do it. We should
make sure each team has a
github admin in place who
could make such a change.<br>
<br>
I like option 1, which to
retell my understanding
means that we'll enable
github to require the
checks to pass and you
can't merge or push
without them passing. Is
that good, would there be
any -1's for a change on
core like this?<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
To share my perspective
about plugins being in the
Pulp organization, they are
there only for a clear
association with Pulp on
github. Any open source
plugin that creates value
with Pulp and does it with a
debatable level of
responsibility towards its
users I think is probably ok
to include. I don't expect
them to give up any control
or autonomy if they do that.
The benefit of bringing
these different plugin
communities closer together
through the organization is
hopefully towards common
services like automated
testing and such over time.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515m_1667988254304518129HOEnZb">
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515m_1667988254304518129h5">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On
Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at
8:28 AM, Milan Kovacik
<span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:mkovacik@redhat.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">mkovacik@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px
#ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><span>
<div
class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:x-small">> Option 1: Nothing merges without passing
PR runner
tests, ever,
even if the
issue is
rooted in the
configuration
or
infrastructure
of the test
runners or an
expired
certificate
etc. This
would light a
fire to get
these issues
resolved ASAP
because
nothing can
happen without
them.<br>
</div>
</span>
<div
class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:x-small">I like this option for the same reasons Daniel
mentioned; it
also implies an
up-to-date
infrastructure
and better
reliability:
both false
negative and
false positive
(test/build)
failures will
still happen in
all the three
options
regardless, but
at least false
negatives won't
be ignored.<br>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:x-small">This might also help catching environment
issues sooner in
the process
(such as a
third-party
library update
causing a
legitimate
failure because
of e.g backwards
incompatibility).<br>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:x-small">When it comes to plugin independence, we could
state that only
plugins
conforming with
these (core) PR
criteria can be
"adopted" and
tagged as
Pulp-approved/compatible
and kept under
the Pulp
project.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:x-small">--<br>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:x-small">milan<br>
</div>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515m_1667988254304518129m_-333326896574208398h5">On
Mon, Feb 5,
2018 at 7:21
PM, Daniel
Alley <span
dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:dalley@redhat.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">dalley@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515m_1667988254304518129m_-333326896574208398h5">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Jeremy, I
don't think
David was
continuing our
line of
discussion on
policy, but
rather
rebutting the
original idea
that Github's
"required
checks" be
enforced for
all plugins.
That goes back
to the whole
difference
between having
a policy that
requires green
tests and
making it
physically
impossible to
merge PRs
without them.
Maybe some
plugins want a
policy and
some plugins
are fine with
hard required
checks on
Github, but
the latter
shouldn't be
enforced on
everyone - is
what I think
David was
saying.<br>
<br>
</div>
Also, my
understanding
is that
pulp_deb is
not strictly
under our
control, but
that we're
hosting it
specifically
to let misa
use our QA
infrastructure,
and because we
might want to
productise it
at some point
in the future.<br>
</div>
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515m_1667988254304518129m_-333326896574208398m_-8635796946094391231HOEnZb">
<div
class="m_-3002604935963821599m_2786297830724450515m_1667988254304518129m_-333326896574208398m_-8635796946094391231h5">
<div
class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">On
Mon, Feb 5,
2018 at 12:55
PM, Jeremy
Audet <span
dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:jaudet@redhat.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jaudet@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><span>>
Regarding the
plugin repos,
last year we
talked about
plugins being
completely
autonomous
(aside from
abiding by our
Code of
Conduct).
Wouldn’t
setting the
required
checks for
projects like
pulp_file,
pulp_python,
pulp_deb, etc
violate this
autonomy? In
other words,
shouldn’t we
let plugin
teams decide
their own
policy and
what checks to
enable?<br>
<br>
</span>Are
pulp_file,
pulp_python,
pulp_deb, and
so on
autonomous
projects? The
fact that
they're hosted
on GitHub
under the pulp
organization
[1] indicates
that they're
under our
control. Since
they're under
our control,
we get to set
the rules. If
any of these
projects
really are
autonomous,
then somebody
please kick
them out of
the pulp
organization.<br>
<br>
</div>
If I was
writing
paychecks to a
team of devs,
and they
refused to
adopt basic QA
processes for
their
projects, I'd
happily fire
the entire dev
team. I can't
be the only
one who's had
this thought.<br>
<br>
[1] <a
href="https://github.com/pulp"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://github.com/pulp</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<span>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Pulp-dev
mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a><br>
<a
href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.redhat.com/mailman<wbr>/listinfo/pulp-dev</a><br>
<br>
</span></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Pulp-dev mailing
list<br>
<a
href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a><br>
<a
href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.redhat.com/mailman<wbr>/listinfo/pulp-dev</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Pulp-dev mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a><br>
<a
href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.redhat.com/mailman<wbr>/listinfo/pulp-dev</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Pulp-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a><br>
<a
href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.redhat.com/mailman<wbr>/listinfo/pulp-dev</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>