Hell yah! This is great! Thank you! sri
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Martin Pitt <martin.p...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > Hello fellow GNOMErs, > > after the first round of discussions a month ago[1] about the jhbuild > CI building/testing [2] I'd like to give some status update. > > Since then, Jean-Baptiste has worked quite a bit on the scripts: > Updating git checkouts as well as building modules are now > parallelized (building still respects the dependency tree), so that we > can now rebuild all the 160 modules in something like 15 minutes now. > This brings us much closer to useful commit-level testing. It now also > uses "jhbuild sysdeps" and a much smaller hardcoded list of extra > build dependencies (which are not exposed by the module lists). > If a build or test fails it now uses jhbuild's -C option to restart > with a clean checkout, to avoid tripping over build system cruft from > autotools file changes. I spent some time chasing down long-standing > failures in some modules, as well as filing bugs for newly identified > regressions. > > Since the announcement, the system has stabilized a lot, and the set > of test failures is now quite stable. > > The thing that hurts most currently is that the machine is behind a > proxy. This causes quite a lot of test failures (like libgdata's > youtube test), as well as spurious build failures like [3]. We do plan > to move this machine into the DMZ soon, so that it has unrestricted > network access. I'd like to postpone sending out notifications until > that happens, as otherwise we'll spam people too much about irrelevant > issues. > > Once that happens, we'll set up email notifications for state changes > (e. g. "pass → fails to build", or "test fail → pass") and send them > to Jean-Baptiste and myself first, to give this some more real-world > testing. If that has a low enough noise ratio, we were planning to > mail the maintainers of the affected modules (if the module has a > .doap file), with some hint to notify us if they want to opt out of > notifications. > > Then we can investigate for some time how this works, and debate if > filing bugs would be better or not. > > Does that sound like an acceptable plan? > > Thanks, > > Martin > > [1] > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2013-February/msg00025.html > [2] https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Raring/view/JHBuild%20Gnome/ > [3] > https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Raring/view/JHBuild%20Gnome/job/jhbuild-amd64-libgee/92/artifact/libgee.log > -- > Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de > Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) > > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list >
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
