This group is locked. No changes can be made to the group while it is locked.
Date
1 - 5 of 5
"I would prefer you didn't submit this..." comment to my patch?
|
Rob Sherwood <rob.sherwood@...>
Hi, Apologies for the newbie questions: I've been reading a bunch of the project code and submitted a small patch to resolve some of the warnings that I see in eclipse. It really shouldn't affect the code at all, but I seem to have gotten a weird comment from Jenkins (the automated build system) saying "I would prefer you didn't submit this..."
Is this message from a human or from a script? In either case, can someone help me get more context as to what it means? I'm not passionate about the patch so I can certainly withdraw it if it breaks something.
Please advise and thanks, - Rob . |
|
|
|
Rob Sherwood <rob.sherwood@...>
Never mind... apparently I broke a unittest and my change really did break things. Perhaps Jenkins could have been more direct about this, but oh well :-) Sorry for the noise.
- Rob . On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Rob Sherwood <rob.sherwood@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Gal Sagie <gal.sagie@...>
I am not expert but from looking at the link you posted it seems one of the unit tests failed (Regression tests): org.opendaylight.controller.sal.core.PathTest.testPathValid
java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: null at java.util.AbstractList.remove(AbstractList.java:161) at org.opendaylight.controller.sal.core.PathTest.testPathValid(PathTest.java:82) On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Rob Sherwood <rob.sherwood@...> wrote:
Best Regards , The G. |
|
|
|
Giovanni Meo <gmeo@...>
Hi Rob,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
sorry for the unpolite message from jenkins. As you correctly pointed out it came out of unit test breakage. Thanks, Giovanni On 11-May-13 03:58, Rob Sherwood wrote:
Never mind... apparently I broke a unittest and my change really did break --
Giovanni Meo Via del Serafico, 200 Telephone: +390651644000 00142, Roma Mobile: +393480700958 Italia Fax: +390651645917 VOIP: 8-3964000 “The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” -- Wm. Arthur Ward IETF credo: "Rough consensus and running code" |
|
|
|
Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...>
Rob,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
No harm no foul :) That's why Jenkins does its verify dance on every contribution before its merged
to master (and, typically, before anyone gets a chance to actual do code review on it)… it radically reduces
the chances of build breakage and test regressions.
If you fix the breakage and push that change with the same 'Change id:' it will show up as a second patch
set on the same Gerrit request, and Jenkins will be triggered to re-run the CI for verification.
There's a description of the Development Infrastructure here:
that should shed some light :)
Ed On May 10, 2013, at 8:58 PM, Rob Sherwood <rob.sherwood@...> wrote:
|
|
|