Re: [rdo-list] Packstack refactor and future ideas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Pevec" <apevec(a)redhat.com>
To: "Boris Derzhavets" <bderzhavets(a)hotmail.com>
Cc: "rdo-list" <rdo-list(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2016 5:13:51 PM
Subject: Re: [rdo-list] Packstack refactor and future ideas
> I hardly understand why working features should be dropped due to not
> passing through CI.
If it is not tested, it doesn't work, by definition.
Well, it has been constantly manually tested and most use cases work.
If a feature of a piece of software is difficult to being automatically tested
should it be dropped?
I think this is a bit extreme, the features that can't or won't be tested can
be flagged as "unstable" or "experimental" but not just dropped.
We want to ensure, with resources available, that Packstack works
well
in the future for the use-case it was designed for, proof-of-concept
installations.
We all want that and i've noticed that people does multinode PoC installations
Cheers,
Ivan