On 06/25/2014 10:27 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (25/06/14 22:04), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> On 06/25/2014 09:54 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (25/06/14 21:45), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Please find attached v2 of the CI patch.
>>>
>>> This version pulls Red Hat distro dependencies from contrib/sssd.spec.in.
>>> I was able to find a way to do it without resorting to unsafe sudo rules.
>>>
>>> As before, I would still prefer to move clang/lcov to the moderate set and
>>> distcheck/mock to the full set. Is there anyone for/against that?
>>>
>>> Examples of full test set output on CI machines:
>>>
>>> Debian Testing
http://sssd-ci.idm.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com:8080/job/new_private_master_deb...
>>> Fedora 20
http://sssd-ci.idm.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com:8080/job/new_private_master_fed...
>>> RHEL6
http://sssd-ci.idm.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com:8080/job/new_private_master_rhe...
>>> RHEL7
http://sssd-ci.idm.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com:8080/job/new_private_master_rhe...
>>>
>> Do not paste private link to upstream mailing list. It is not the fist time.
>> It is not open source way.
>
> I agree, posting links to internal resources is not very nice (although more
> useful than not) and will remove them. However, I would say that berating
> fellow engineers hurts our open source way more.
If you mean me I will like to see citation, because I have not
offended anyone.
I would say the offended is in a better position to conclude that.
I've just criticised wrong approach. Firstly in constructive way,
secondly
strinct NACK.
The problem is the manner. A "please" wouldn't go amiss. Then, last time
was
about a commit message, this time about a message to the maillist, which is
not the same thing.
Sincerely,
Nick