On Thu, 2019-09-19 at 14:21 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 02:45:53PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-09-19 at 09:36 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> Jumping in a bit late, but why do we care about this distinction in
> CI at all? In our existing setup, for all projects 'make check' is
> executed if and only if 'make syntax-check' has succeeded, so the
> separation is fairly arbitrary and doesn't really buy us anything as
> far as I can tell.
I thought we ran the two jobs in parallel but I guess not.
No, we don't :)
Mostly I'm
interested in having CI failure mails contain clear error information.
With the jobs we currently have I find the alerts from the syntax-check
jobs clearer/easier to consume, than the check jobs. So I'm wary in
having the syntax-check results just be intermingled with the check job
results.
I don't think I'm subscribed to the CI mails you talk about, so
generally when I'm investigating a failure I open the full log in the
Jenkins Web UI and make liberal use of Ctrl+F. That seems to work
well enough for me.
If the output of 'ninja test' is too confusing to parse when included
in the body of a mail, then I think the solution is to try and
improve it, because that's what developers will see when they run the
same command in their terminals.
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization