[Nix-dev] Travis false-positives

[Georges Dubus]

Hi Peter

I started working with travis because there was already some low quality
patches that broke evaluation when merged. Hopefully, this kind of bad
patches don't get merged anymore.

However, what you describe is indeed a problem. I'll see what I can do to
inform contributor of actual role of travis, and what to expect from it.

George

Georges Dubus

2014-11-08 0:24 GMT+01:00 Peter Simons <simons at cryp.to>:

> Hi Georges,
>
>  > I think of it more as proof of concept of what CI on the pull
>  > requests can bring us than a final testing workflow.
>
> unfortunately, users submitting pull requests cannot see that the
> travis-ci job isn't supposed to be considered "reliable". I've run into
> cases where people submit totally untested patches as a PR, because they
> assume travis-ci will test the patch for them. Travis, however, comes
> back with some kind of system failure that gives no indication whether
> the patch is good or not.
>
> This means that users are more likely to submit broken patches because
> they rely on a safety net that actually doesn't exist. Because of this
> phenomenon, the travis-ci job actually decreases the quality of our
> submissions!
>
> Is it possible to add a note to the PR status pages that draws people's
> attention to the fact that the travis-ci service is experimental?
>
> Best regards,
> Peter
>
> _______________________________________________
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev at lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/attachments/20141112/420b6dd3/attachment.html