[Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Issues with stable process

Andy Lutomirski luto at amacapital.net
Thu Jul 16 01:05:11 UTC 2015


On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:24 PM, NeilBrown <neilb at suse.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:13:54 +0300 James Bottomley
>
>>
>> I just use the rule of thumb: must be in -next for two days because then
>> I know 0day (and the other checkers) have also run.
>
> Do you *really* know that?
> Given that there seems to be value in knowing "0day has run
> successfully", should we ask for an interface to do exactly that?
>
> Hey .. we could even have a bot which watches lkml for pull requests,
> grabs the git hash, and checks that 0day has run on it.  If not -
> automatic public shaming ensues :-)
>

As of today, I'm much less convinced that -next is suitable for this
purpose.  I have a really dumb, blatant, obvious regression sitting in
-next right now, and it's been there for a couple of weeks with no one
spotting it.  The 0-day bot didn't spot it either (and yes, I emailed
Fengguang suggesting another test for the bot).

I think it's hard to find any real substitute for a soak in -rc or a
real release.

--Andy


More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list