On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 17:50 +0200, Dan HorĂ¡k wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2020 08:29:45 -0700
Adam Williamson <adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 08:49 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > I think here we need better ways of testing software in Rawhide
> > other than well, running Rawhide (VM or bare metal), besides the
> > old mock chroot xnest hack. I'm open to suggestion here.
>
>
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/ ?
I think Richard is rather looking for OpenQA for testing the GUI unless
the FreeCAD functionality can be also tested thru some command line /
text mode interface.
Oh, yeah, I somehow jumped over the references to X in his mail. The
tricky thing there is we can't really run per-package tests for Rawhide
in openQA currently for a couple of reasons:
1) Resources
2) Base stability
the per-package tests (the ones we run on updates) rely on the base
environment - i.e. the underlying distro - being pretty stable, it's no
use to anyone if the tests fail on every update/package not because the
package is broken but because the base image doesn't boot or GNOME is
broken or whatever. This can already be slightly hairy for Branched (I
have to keep a close eye on the tests there and fix or work around
issues quite often) and would be a nightmare for Rawhide.
It's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem (one way to *make* Rawhide more
stable is to do this sort of testing), but I definitely feel like
whichever one came second in this instance.
We do run *per-compose* tests on Rawhide, of course, but those are kind
of "after the fact": they run on whatever's already gone into Rawhide,
you have to push your change in to find out if it's broken. Which
doesn't sound like what Richard wants in this case.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net