Hi! > On 4 Mar 2021, at 22:58, Sergey Kaplun wrote: > > On 04.03.21, Sergey Ostanevich wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Thanks for the patchset - brief review >> >> part 1 - obvious, LGTM. >> >> part 2 - LGTM, good to have all follow-ups set. > > Do you mean to reference all follow-ups inside commit message? > There could be just one - if no specific GH created. >> >> part 3 - should have a follow-up ticket to cover all suppressions, if we plan to fix them. > > Ditto. > There are some follow ups that can be grepped by qa and luajit labels. > And this is something I don’t want to do - to grep using lables. The patch should have reference, so I can see all links at once. >> >> part 4-8 are LGTM >> >> part 9 (_G and some modules in Tarantool are different): Are we plan to fix it in some way? There should be a follow-up then. > > For now I can't see any good solution, except ignoring them by special > option like slow tests. > I don’t object to ignore them. My question if we plan to tweak the tests to align with Tarantool? What will happen to the test if Tarantool will change preloaded modules? >> >> parts 10-15 are LGTM >> >> Regards, >> Sergos