On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 02:13:02PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 24/07/2019 13:32, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 8:02 AM Miro HronĨok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 24. 07. 19 10:24, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > > That said, having to go round adding a mega ugly config file
> > > to every package that looks an awful lot like an internal braindump
> > > from some system doesn't really inspire confidence, or make for an
> > > easy way of opting in.
> >
> > This. The gating.yaml file is terrible.
>
> Do either of you have a better suggestion?
Well more ordinary YAML would be a good start.
I mean I literally had to go and try and read the YAML spec
to try and work out what it was doing and let me tell you, for
something that I had always thought was a simple format it has
a very long and hard to read spec...
So a single document would be good, and get rid of the tags
which I assume are the result of serialising objects with
those name.
The very.long.reverse.domain.test.names are not ideal.
Agreed, we could look for better ones.
Then there's decision_context which apparently does nothing
but has to be there.
It is used! It is what define which tests are used to gate the build/update when
entering the -testing repo vs which ones are used to gate entering the -stable
repo.
Is there any rule type other than PassingTestCaseRule?
There actually are others:
https://docs.pagure.org/greenwave/policies.html
There is the one that is used to pull policies from remote locations (which is
what is used to allow package-specific rules) and we had another one in the past
to allow, globally, certain rules to apply only to some packages.
That being said, maybe there would be a way to simplify the syntax for remote
policies, so I've opened a ticket to greenwave to see what they think about it
and if it is doable:
https://pagure.io/greenwave/issue/465
Thanks for your feedback :)
Pierre