From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33577) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gMVBl-0006GL-E3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 04:40:54 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gMVBg-0006Wx-Bu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 04:40:53 -0500 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20181109221213.7310-1-crosa@redhat.com> <20181112104953.GB11580@linux.fritz.box> <20181112160025.GE11580@linux.fritz.box> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 10:39:57 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Cleber Rosa's message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2018 12:36:33 -0500") Message-ID: <875zx18geq.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] Acceptance tests for qemu-img List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cleber Rosa Cc: Kevin Wolf , Eduardo Habkost , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta , Max Reitz , Caio Carrara , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= Drive-by comment... Cleber Rosa writes: [...] > My impression is that the "infrastructure for block tests" is not that > different from the infrastructure needed by other tests, specially other > QEMU tests. [...] Yes. The actual reason for having a completely separate testing infrastructure for block tests is that it predates testing infrastructure for anything else. Moving the tests to common infrastructure would be a sizable one-time effort we can ill afford. Maintaining multiple testing infrastructures is an ongoing effort we can also ill afford. Perhaps moving to common infrastructure is impractical. I don't know. What I do know is beware of temporal discounting. [...]