Thorsten Ziehm wrote: > Hi Mathias, > > I do not see the need to bring the build bots near to the build > environment here in Hamburg. The request for build bots was (as I know) > to have builds in different environments to find build issues in these > different environment. When these environment will be nearly the same, > then we miss to find these build breakers. No, you are mixing build bots and Tinderbox builds. But even if we used Build Bots in that way, I don't see any reason for "either-or".
> Perhaps to use a build bots for CWS builds or for master builds here in > Hamburg could be a solution. But my intension is to search for all > requirements which are needed in build environment and want to find then > a solution. And I do not want to nail down now, that we have to use > build bots only on the request by QA community. Because I do not see > this request is valid (see my earlier mail in this thread). Well, I hope that you see at least the validness of the request to be able to build OOo on all relevant platforms in a way that it can be tested, in Hamburg or elsewhere, using the tools that the community is able to access. If you have a better idea to fulfill that requirement, fine. For now I don't see any easier and more reliable way to do it. And IMHO this is an urgent request, so we shouldn't postpone a solution for months until we have discussed each and everything do the end. > > I talked with some people in RE and BuildEnv over the past weeks and > I want to have a build environment which can be used for the next years. > Perhaps it is possible to begin on a white paper to define new tooling, > new processes etc. But this will take time. And I do not want to get > now a solution which isn't handle by the RE resources currently. When > I start this project I will invite you and others for brainstorming, > but we should stop now saying this or that is the best solution for now. > We need a stable solution for the next years, especially when we want > or have to switch to a DSCM. The question remains why we need to think about new tooling, processes etc. if standardizing on a build environment would be enough. But of course getting people involved never is a bad idea, so it's a good thing to see something going on. I hope that the outcome of that will be a simple and fast build process, as the lack of that is still a major problem not only for "non Hamburg" developers. Being able to build all "core" OOo components a developer is interested in in e.g. less than one hour (dreaming is allowed, isn't it?) would open a lot of opportunities to improve our work, especially wrt. to speed, tranparacy, quality and cooperation. This will require a switch to a DSCM (as speeding up the build doesn't help a lot if getting the source still takes the same amount of time), but AFAIK this is on the way anyway, so I take that for granted. Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't reply to "nospamfor...@gmx.de". I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
