Also, maybe we should add in git tips (http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Tools/Git) a line about `git fetch -p`, which allows to remove locally branches that where deleted on the server?
Le 14/11/2014 10:04, Sergey Sharybin a écrit : > For me it seems this happens because Dalai didn't follow the updates in the > ML and pushed testbuild branch again/ Which for sure created new branch and > pushed all the commits. So in this particular case proper solution would be > if the developers follow the ML, imo. > > I can also forbid creating new branches but afraid it'll cause more > troubles. And one more thing to be watched -- do not `git pull --rebase` > after the merge commit. > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr> > wrote: > >> Don’t think so - and testbuild (now experimental-build) is not the only >> one, this can happen (and already have happened) in any branch if you >> mess a merge or whatever (even happens when backporting fixes into >> release branches…). >> Le 14/11/2014 08:00, Thomas Dinges a écrit : >>> That's not the first time I have these 100+ e-mails from the testbuild >>> branch in my inbox. Can't we do something about this? ... >>> >>> Am 14.11.2014 um 04:47 schrieb Dalai Felinto: >>>> How to make a build now? After I click on 'Force Build' I land in a >>>> page saying: "Authorization Failed. You are not allowed to perform >>>> this action." >>>> >>>> And for the records, in the future it would help to have the outcome >>>> of such an important discussion re-sent to the list as an email on its >>>> own (instead of a reply in a 11-email long thread) ... I just pushed >>>> 'testbuild' back to the servers :( .... [and deleted it after, but >>>> still, the notification commits will be all over everyone's email >>>> boxes]. >>>> >>>> Dalai >>>> -- >>>> blendernetwork.org/dalai-felinto >>>> www.dalaifelinto.com >>>> >>>> >>>> 2014-10-16 8:16 GMT-03:00 Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>: >>>>> Hi devs, >>>>> >>>>> So, we resurrected testbuild as 'experimental-build', getting rid of >> the >>>>> issues that caused last week's shutdown of this tool (i.e. builds >>>>> publicly available from builder.b.o., and confusing name with >> testbuilds >>>>> done during release process). >>>>> >>>>> Note this tool implies commit access to our main git repository. >>>>> >>>>> Here are the steps to follow to make an experimental build: >>>>> * Checkout the 'experimental-build' branch, merge master in, >>>>> squash-apply your code to it, revert last commit, and push to origin >>>>> (see below[1] for an concrete example); >>>>> * Go to one of the buildbot's builders' page (e.g. >>>>> https://builder.blender.org/builders/linux_glibc211_x86_64_scons) - >> note >>>>> you'll need to do that for all platforms you want to build on. >>>>> * Select 'experimental-build' instead of 'master' in the branch >>>>> dropdown, copy-paste the exact hash of your squashed-commit of your >>>>> patch into 'revision' field, and force the build. >>>>> * Go to the experimental 'hidden' sub-folder of >>>>> https://builder.blender.org/download/ and download your builds from >>>>> there asap. >>>>> * DO NOT SHARE ABOVE LINK PUBLICLY! It's your responsibility to >>>>> distribute your builds (e.g. through graphicall, dropbox, whatever), >>>>> 'official' blender site should not be involved in this. Note that the >>>>> next experimental build on the same builder will replace current one, >> so >>>>> builder.b.o is not a reliable storage for such builds anyway! >>>>> >>>>> Quite obviously, let's try not to abuse the feature! :) >>>>> >>>>> Happy Blending, >>>>> Bastien >>>>> >>>>> [1] Typical git commands to make an experimental build: >>>>> $ git checkout experimental-build >>>>> $ git merge origin/master >>>>> $ git merge --squash mywippatch >>>>> $ git commit >>>>> $ git revert HEAD >>>>> $ git push origin >>>>> $ git checkout master >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Le 12/10/2014 10:39, Sergey Sharybin a écrit : >>>>>> Think we should agree on some better name then and deploy? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Bastien Montagne < >> montagn...@wanadoo.fr> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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