Hi all, I am a bit new so sorry if this question is trivial. I noticed that the httpd's doxygen documentation is regularly built in https://ci.apache.org/builders, so I am wondering if we could build everything in trunk (or all the supported branches) regularly after each commit (getting a daily report of failures/warnings for example in this ML). CentOS is missing among the list of supported testing environments but it might be possible to add it asking to the buildbot owners.
I am probably missing some bits and pieces so if I am completely mistaken please let me know! I'll try to update the related docs (like https://httpd.apache.org/dev/ and /developer) for the newcomers like me :) Thanks! Luca 2015-12-22 6:30 GMT+01:00 Jacob Perkins <jacob.perk...@cpanel.net>: > Hi Eric, > > I’m going to work on setting up a test system for all of our supported > environments so that we can test our platform quicker and provide feedback > during the T&R period. > > I’d love to try and give back to the project honestly. cPanel has used > Apache in the core of our webstack for at least 10 years so it would be > great if we could provide some extra eyes for testing releases, if not more. > > Sorry if I came across a little… crass. It’s been a long day. > — > Jacob Perkins > Product Owner > *cPanel Inc.* > > jacob.perk...@cpanel.net > Office: 713-529-0800 x 4046 > Cell: 713-560-8655 > > On Dec 21, 2015, at 5:20 PM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Jacob Perkins <jacob.perk...@cpanel.net> > wrote: > > CentOS 5 still ships with OpenSSL 0.9.8, and is still supported for another > year or so. Considering there’s a lot of servers still running CentOS 5 > (and > possibly older), it feels as if this would have been caught. > > > Do you mean could or should have been caught? > > It wasn't caught until someone compiled it against openssl < 0.9.8m > (which is not the latest 0.9.8). I can't see many scenarios where someone > will compile a new 2.4.x release and not have a contemporary openssl -- > beyond trying to catch exactly these kinds of problems during a release. > > Especially something as small as a missing semicolon. > > > Well, usually small problems are the ones that fly under the radar. > Anything > catastrophic to the build will not go unnoticed, but someone has to build > on the > affected platform/compiler/prereqs/???. > > Would a linter / compile check to proactively check those things help? > > > Dunno, possible. > > >
