[Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

Robin Chan rchan at redhat.com
Tue Jan 15 19:21:33 UTC 2019


Great. I withdraw:
#3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
to be involved in #1 agreements.

And to re-iterate and be very clear, Kersom's ", just to communicate QE in
case of test changes. We already have a system in place on git." looks like
getting an approved code review from someone in [1].

That works for me and I appreciate the clarifications.
Robin


On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:15 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:

> I agree. I think devs can merge changes to pulp-smash tests in pulp repos
> but they should get it reviewed by QE before merging--which, as Kersom
> says, we've been doing.
>
> David
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:11 PM Kersom <kersom at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> David, thanks for driving this.
>>
>> I agree with your suggestions Robin.
>>
>> All currently present on [1] should have commit bit for those repos.
>>
>> I think it is fine to the devs to have commit to the test repos, just to
>> communicate QE in case of test changes. We already have a system in place
>> on git.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Robin Chan <rchan at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A few suggestions.
>>>
>>> #1. QE good with [1] - you all agree these are the folks with commit
>>> bit? In other words, you trust each other to do the merge with your own
>>> agreements of who has expertise and when things are ready - all the details?
>>> #2. I would suggest we are suggesting QE have commit bit access to the
>>> specific subdirectories;
>>>   a) pulp_file/pulp_file/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp_file repo)
>>>   b) pulp/pulp_core/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp repo)
>>> I know this is not enforceable via the GIT settings, but helpful to be
>>> explicit about as we include this in agreement.
>>> #3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
>>> developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
>>> to be involved in #1 agreements.
>>>
>>> Fully supportive of this effort. I was one of the folks who gave my word
>>> prior to PUP-6 and see this as making sure the folks have what they need to
>>> get stuff done and keeping decision making with the folks closest to the
>>> work (i.e. QE makes decisions about all things QE.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Robin
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository, we
>>>> promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
>>>> repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
>>>> commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.
>>>>
>>>> Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1]
>>>> the commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to
>>>> smash tests:
>>>>
>>>> pulp/pulp
>>>> pulp/pulp_file
>>>>
>>>> I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access
>>>> to their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by
>>>> QE.
>>>>
>>>> Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January
>>>> 30th.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
>>>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20190115/43afba6f/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list