Miloš Prchlík

> > Correct, I guess. Yes, this patch alone will not bring any speedup with tmt alone. It's not part of the current implementation, but it should be possible to...

> > This is really weird, I wouldn't expect tmt to create invalid plans, and it looks like there's some kind of leak of fields: `feeling-safe` shouldn't be there. I...

Nevermind, setting "feeling safe" does the trick. I can reproduce it now, looking into it.

> Nevermind, setting "feeling safe" does the trick. I can reproduce it now, looking into it. Step subcommands of tmt do accept `--feeling-safe` option: ```python @classmethod def options(cls, how: Optional[str]...

> @happz, planning to cover any remaining items from the checklist? I guess a short release note would make sense? I didn't plan to, and I can happily live without...

> @happz It is not clear to me how this affects report step? Is there a single report or split report? IOW if I do reportportal report and configure it...

> Ah, so it does not do multiple provision+execution in parallel? Exactly, it does not. It splits plans, but tmt does not know how to run more plans at the...

> @pfdaly thank you for the commit! Do you have an example of results.yaml ? Indeed, an example of how the file produced by `tmt-report-result` looks like would be nice....

> This is the current contents of the results.yaml file for each test. I had followed the result specification. +1! > I only included the properties which I thought were...

> @pfdaly with the method proposed, we may be missing a few things in the results.yaml for a test plan. Not sure if it's intended to work this way, though....