[PATCH 00/10] Add support for tests "statuses"

[Bryce Harrington]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:14:54PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> 2015-07-29 11:53, Thomas Petazzoni:
> > On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:58:38 +0100, Stephen Finucane wrote:
> > > This series introduces support for patch "statuses". These are results
> > > of tests and other automated checks executed on any given patch. Such
> > > tests and checks can range from unit tests and license validation to
> > > large integration and performance testing. These statuses can be
> > > provided by multiple users, thus allowing for a "distibuted test
> > > infrastructure".
> > > 
> > > This feature requires a number of changes, such as new models and
> > > extensions to the templates. Some new "endpoints" are provided for the
> > > XML-RPC API along with a minimal extension to the 'pwclient'
> > > application. It is envisioned that both this application and the
> > > broader collection of scripts provided with patchwork will be expanded
> > > on by the community as required.
> > > 
> > > This feature is entirely optional and can be ignored by users if so
> > > desired.
> > 
> > Rather than a concept of "status", wouldn't it be better to simply
> > associate "tags" to patches ?
> > 
> > For example, when a patch successfully passes CI, you add a given tag
> > to the patch, or when it fails CI, you add another tag. And the web
> > interface would allow to filter the patches depending on which tag they
> > contain (or not).
> 
> The goal is to have counters for Success/Warning/Failure as it is done
> for A/R/T.
> Note that A/R/T are not handled as tags because numbers are meaningful.

Yeah tags wouldn't be adequate, for many projects what's interesting is
the count of failures and whether it's increasing or decreasing.  :-)

Simple tags wouldn't cut it.

Bryce