Dealing with disabled tests

[pnkfelix]

Meeting proposal info

• Title: dealing with disabled tests
• Type: technical

Summary

We sometimes disable tests because some other component we don't control (e.g. LLVM) is causing them to fail; see e.g. rust-lang/rust#99853

But we should put structures/protocols in place to ensure that such tests are revisited in the future, rather than just lying unaddressed.

About this issue

This issue corresponds to a meeting proposal for the compiler team
steering meeting. It corresponds to a possible topic of
discussion. You can read more about the steering meeting procedure
here.

Comment policy

These issues are meant to be used as an "announcements channel"
regarding the proposal, and not as a place to discuss the technical
details. Feel free to subscribe to updates. We'll post comments when
reviewing the proposal in meetings or making a scheduling decision.
In the meantime, if you have questions or ideas, ping the proposers
on Zulip (or elsewhere).

[apiraino]

Also mention of rust-lang/rust#88520 as another example (iiuc the context of that issue)

[lqd]

Is the following in scope for that meeting: is it possible to ensure these optional components' tests are indeed executed on CI ? (Or is that more of a t-infra concern). I'm thinking of the needs-lld tests in particular, that we currently can run locally but not on CI.

[wesleywiser]

@jieyouxu mentions the related topic https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/242791-t-infra/topic/Reporting.20test.20suite.20statistics.20after.20merge/with/500706741

[apiraino]

meeting scheduled for 2025-04-11 at 09:00 o'clock timezone -05

@rustbot label meeting-scheduled

[apiraino]

Meeting notes on HackMD https://hackmd.io/wxlzv9jeTT6yk5LuGulqZg