On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Dirk Pranke <dpra...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Well, practically, there's very little difference between XP and Vista
> (about 10 baselines).
I see. Looking at your rebaseline checkin, it looks like it's entirely
complex font tests as well. I think given that, it will be very rare that
we'll need to deal with XP rebaselines, so the current state of the world is
probably fine.
> I think it's a more general issue that we should discuss how we want
> to divide our build machines between XP, Vista, and, soon, Win 7 (as
> you say below). Just doubling or tripling the number of machines seems
> like it has minimal ROI. On the other hand, flipping the machines to
> 64-bit Vista may speed them up substantially ...
I agree that this is the primary issue to address. Changing to 64 bit
machines should considerably help with cycle time if the machines have a lot
of RAM and >2 cores. Nicolas, Marc-Antoine, do you have opinions on this? Do
you know if we'd be able to get Vista or Win7 machines with more RAM/CPUs?
Also, what do you think of the idea of having only Release bots for XP/Win7
and having both Release and Debug bots for Vista?
> The code that I changed did get reviewed, but only I reviewed the
> images themselves. I did this after discussing the pros and cons with
> Darin yesterday. I'm not sure that there's a lot of value in two
> people staring at the sets of images.
>
With these large rebaseline changes it's valuable just to get a sanity check
on the images from someone else. In practice, I've seen a number of cases
where the code reviewer did actually have substantive feedback.
Ojan
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
