Did you try using public_html/testbuilds instead? There's also a code in the template which lusts the dirs, could comment that out. On Oct 11, 2014 11:27 PM, "Bastien Montagne" <montagn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Following Sergey's suggestion (put testbuilds in a separate dir) I > fought a bit with my local version of buildbot to get it running again. > > In the end, looks like a very simple change is enough, in > master_unpack.py, something like: > > diff --git a/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py > b/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py > index ecacf3b..f5c8493 100644 > --- a/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py > +++ b/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py > @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ if platform == '': > sys.exit(1) > > # extract > -directory = 'public_html/download' > +directory = 'public_html/download' if branch == 'master' else > 'public_html/download/testbuilds' > > try: > zf = z.open(package) > > public_html/download/testbuilds must be created beforehand of course. > > On my local web buildbot UI, that dir is automatically listed under the > download page… Not sure whether we consider that as safe enough for > users not to mess with it? Guess we can find a way to hide it, otherwise. > > As a side note, do not think listing those builds publically is needed > at all, they are replaced by next one so dev has to 'backup' them anyway. > > And yes, probably renaming could be nice too… 'experimental' sounds good > to me. > > Bastien > > Le 11/10/2014 20:26, Sergey Sharybin a écrit : > > It _had been_ discussed several times at least. Starting from discussion > in > > #lbendercoders between me, Dan, Bastien and even Ton. Then once it was > all > > set up (and i believe some discussion happened in the ML as well). Once > all > > the changes to the infrastructure were done it was announced in the ML: > > http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2014-July/043948.html > In > > such a situation it's real weird to have a post-factum "it should have > > never been done this way". > > > > As an addition to the previous suggestion: > > - We can as well just put a REAL HUGE BANNER on top of the experimental > > builds just to stress once again that they're experimental if it'll be > > considered useful to have those builds listed to public. > > - We can rename "testbuild" to something like "devbuild" (as > > developer-build) or "experimental" to prevent possible confusion with the > > testbuilds being done as a part of the release build. > > > > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Ton Roosendaal <t...@blender.org> > wrote: > > > >> Hi Bastien, > >> > >> Sorry, I've asked around and had the impression Sergey added the feature > >> on builder.blender.org. > >> > >> The fact that building branches on buildbot is useful is not disputed. > >> It's just not acceptable to offer an official build for download on a > >> popular page on blender.org, with unknown patches or branches applied. > >> > >> Let's just keep the lines short and discuss decisions like this together > >> well? > >> > >> Laters, > >> > >> -Ton- > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------- > >> Ton Roosendaal - t...@blender.org - www.blender.org > >> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute > >> Entrepotdok 57A - 1018AD Amsterdam - The Netherlands > >> > >> > >> > >> On 11 Oct, 2014, at 18:24, Bastien Montagne wrote: > >> > >>> I’m not happy at all with both the decision and the way it was taken. > >>> Fyi, I was the one who spent a fair amount of time some months agon > >>> setting this up, and I think it has proven to be really really useful > >>> for all wip projects around. > >>> > >>> Further more, I do not see any reason to just cut this out out of the > >>> blue, there was no urgency at all here. And I do not even really > >>> understand the root of the issue, imho people who are not able to make > a > >>> distinction between builds tagged as 'official' and builds tagged as > >>> 'testbuild' have nothing to do on builder.b.o. > >>> > >>> But even though, imho it would have been much nicer to ask to add some > >>> way to delete testbuilds from the server, again see no urgency at all > >>> here that could justify this discontinuation. > >>> > >>> Adding back build of all branches will just create much much more mess, > >>> we won’t gain anything. Oh, and people that cannot understand what > >>> 'testbuild' means won’t be able either to distinguish from master and > >>> branches builds - even less I’d say. > >>> > >>> Very disapointed here! > >>> Bastien > >>> > >>> Le 11/10/2014 15:59, Ton Roosendaal a écrit : > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> I've asked Sergey to disable the testbuild branch from automatic > >> building. > >>>> This is currently leading to a confusing situation. People have no > idea > >> what's the code that is in it. It's even being used to apply patches > from > >> the tracker on it. This information is invisible for our website > visitors. > >>>> Worse is that visitors think it's the official release test build, and > >> not a testing branch for coders only. > >>>> We should do this better communicated. Can we just back to the old > >> option that you can build branches? > >>>> This way that branch build gets properly named and timestamped. > >>>> > >>>> The only problem is that too many builds might flood the bot's list of > >> builds. It shouldn't be too hard to make a delete button on that page > for > >> old ones (for admins)? > >>>> Laters, > >>>> > >>>> -Ton- > >>>> > >>>> -------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> Ton Roosendaal - t...@blender.org - www.blender.org > >>>> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute > >>>> Entrepotdok 57A - 1018AD Amsterdam - The Netherlands > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Bf-committers mailing list > >>>> Bf-committers@blender.org > >>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Bf-committers mailing list > >>> Bf-committers@blender.org > >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Bf-committers mailing list > >> Bf-committers@blender.org > >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
