Dave, Is this documented on the wiki? From the home page of our wiki, it's not immediately obvious that people should do this. I can understand Noah's confusion here.
I wanted to modify [1] to add that but I have no permission. --Alex [1] http://wiki.cloudstack.org/display/dev/Git+workflow+in+the+brave+new+world > -----Original Message----- > From: Noah Slater [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 12:06 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: test lifecycle > > My apologies, I had missed that. Good idea. > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Chip Childers > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > Noah, > > > > We had discussed this, and opted to send them to > > [email protected] for general purpose review, > > with the "Send separate e-mails to individuals who broke the build" > > option checked. > > > > -chip > > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Are there any plans to send build failures to the dev mailing list? > > > Might be useful, might not be. :) > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:16 PM, David Nalley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi folks, > > >> > > >> I am thinking about making some changes to jenkins and figured I'd > > >> toss it up here before I do it to make sure no one disagrees. > > >> > > >> Here's my frustration: We are getting spammed by lots of jenkins > > >> notices, many needlessly. > > >> > > >> Prime example: junit failures when the build also failed. IMO we > > >> shouldn't even try running the unit tests as there is an explicit > > >> dependency to compile and we 'know' it won't build. > > >> > > >> So I'd run build-$branch on each commit - if successful it would > > >> trigger build-marvin, build-docs, build-apidocs, and junit. If > > >> junit succeeds build packages (though eventually we probably want > > >> to run-marvin first, but for the moment) > > >> > > >> Thoughts, comments, flames? > > >> > > >> --David > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > NS > > > > > > -- > NS
