On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 07:42, Felix Schumacher
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Am 17.06.19 um 21:57 schrieb sebb:
> > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 17:44, Felix Schumacher
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Am 16.06.19 um 21:02 schrieb Felix Schumacher:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I tried to adapt the buildbot config for JMeter to reflect the git
> >>> migration.
> >>>
> >>> The init-svnVersion step has been removed and most of the "got_revision"
> >>> properties are replaced by the buildnumber to keep a linear numbering
> >>> for the nightlies. The only place were I kept the got_revision property
> >>> is the java property for the "svn" version.
> >>>
> >>> So maybe we have nightlies again tomorrow
> >> Nightlies are building again (after I removed some svn specific stuff in
> >> the build.xml files and used the correct branch everywhere).
> >>
> >> But the nightlies are not getting indexed. There seems to be shell
> >> script involved named create-jmeter-nightlies-index.sh which might have
> >> to be updated. I don't know, since I don't even know where the sources
> >> for that script are.
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/public_html/projects/jmeter/nightlies
>
> Thanks.
>
> At the moment the script looks for directories named r{number} where
> number was the revision of the subversion repo. I changed the number to
> buildnumber (which is way smaller than the revision number). The
> directories are sorted by that number. That will cause the new builds to
> be at the end of the list. The list gets capped and the entries not
> shown -- at least not for the next 30 days or so.
>
> I wonder if it would be nicer to change the naming scheme from r{number}
> to b{number} to indicate that we now use buildnumbers instead of
> revisions.

That would be simplest.

> Or go wild and use git revisions and sort by file creation
> date instead of file name.
>
> What do you think?

But whatever works best; it's not critical to have these.

> Felix
>
> >
> >> Felix
> >>
> >>> Felix
> >>>

Reply via email to