Andre Schnabel schrieb:
Hi Nils,
Stephan Bergmann schrieb:
During FOSDEM, Mechtilde told me about a problem the QA community is
experiencing, namely that buildbot builds (of CWSs) are quite different
functionality-wise from the standard builds (of milestones and releases,
often done by Sun Hamburg Release Engineering). Those differences are
especially apparent in Base, Mechtilde told me. This problem in some
cases prevents easy testing of a CWS by the QA community, or even
thorough testing of a CWS in real life by replacing a standard OOo build
with a buildbot CWS build in (semi-)production use.
I know that there were some issue regarding QA'ing buildbot builds in
past. To get an idea what the real problem is, we should collect those
issues in detail when they occur to find the root cause for them
This is quite like going to the woods and look at each tree seperately to understand,
what "the wood" is.
yes, this is no fun. but the statement was "namely that buildbot builds
(of CWSs) are quite different functionality-wise from the standard
builds". I think those trees need a look at. You know that we do at
other occasion the dicussion "when is an OpenOffice.org build an
original OpenOffice.org (tm) build", so I consider the question
functional differences as an essential one.
you're right, we also need not to analyse the complete wood.
Really, we should investigate into the concrete list of issues before
thinking about any additional infrastructure.
Sorry, this is the totally wrong way of thinking.
hmm, I think we should think carefully about the next steps to do. As
Thorsten mention in another mail, we still have different setups of the
build environment (setsolar vs configure) if we want to merge both into
a common one, we should about the way to go. Having the same setup of
the build box available is one step, nonetheless we need to determine
what the configure switches are to reflect the current settings of the
actual 'setsolar' setup. last time I took a look into configure.in there
were about 240 to 250 variables to set. many of them not boolean, but
version dependent like the compiler version, so we can potentially have
a very huge amount of different environment setup. I think it would help
to have at least a raw picture what the dangerous settings of the
environment really are.
the correct way was: How can we get more people helping in development (here
QA) by using existing infrastructure.
this is in my understanding not excluding each other.
We do not need *additional* infrastructure.
that would be my hope also,
We just want to use existing buildbots to help with cws testing.
yes, lets start working on it,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
