On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 12:43 AM, Marko Käning <mk-li...@email.de> wrote: > Hi Jeremy AND folks,
Hi Marko, > > On 07 Mar 2015, at 02:14 , Jeremy Whiting <jpwhit...@kde.org> wrote: >> I appreciate the efforts you are making :) > > > Thanks. :) > > Just wondering whether I am wasting my time because of my “perfectionism" > here on OSX/CI. Not entirely. What we probably need is a better way for developers to communicate to people on the porting status. The best way to do this would probably be through the build metadata - if the branch has been set then we can probably assume developers think it is ready. > E.g. libkcddb I perhaps shouldn’t have touched at all for now, as it hasn’t > been committed to > since last autumn… Well, for ark it’s different - of course! > > But still, e.g. on my dependencies-RR [1] I have been working for 2 weeks now > and while doing > so I more and more began to wonder whether it makes sense for all the new > projects I am trying > to get into CI... Anything being released needs to have CI really. If the tarballs end up on download.kde.org, it should be Green on CI first. > > I have the feeling that my work (inspired by Christoph Feck’s post on > KDE-DEVEL [2] and his > porting status page [3]) runs a little too uncoordinated - which gives me > only extra head aches, > since I have to iterate through all these projects _manually_ while knowing > far too little of their > real status and objectives. This lead to the result that I > > - could effectively only add about _30_ new projects > > - which means that there are now about 200 projects successfully > built on OSX/CI [4], > > - while having had to go through *170* potential projects from [3] > step by step. > > For all of these I needed to figure out how to build them on OSX/CI and how > to fix their > dependency metadata. 140 projects are thus disabled on OSX/CI for now. I > doubt that this can > be considered a very efficient workflow! ;-) That is quite a bit of effort for little return. Out of interest, what was the primary blocker to getting things to build? 140 seems quite high as a number.... > > I think we need to have another CI IRC meeting sometime soon, where we could > discuss - > besides the change to the new KDE/CI system - also which projects are > actually worth > considering (not only on OSX but) on Linux/CI in general! Anything in Extragear, Frameworks or kde/* should be covered by CI really. If it can't build, we need to fix that. > > What do you think? > > Greets, > Marko > > > > [1] https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122672/ > [2] http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=142434697530863&w=2 > [3] http://developer.kde.org/~cfeck/portingstatus.html > [4] https://trac.macports.org/wiki/KDEProblems/KDEMacPortsCI/Status Cheers, Ben _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
