Good catch, this seems to work fine! :) Le 12/10/2014 08:26, Sergey Sharybin a écrit : > 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
_______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers