Re: Is it time for a build machine?
--- Ven 2/12/11, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto: ... > >> build but they are not in commitable shape. I > think I > >> will go on vacations until the gnumake4 cws is > committed. > thinking about this statement..., no i will not ask further > questions i will forget it ;-) > Heh ... just to clear that.. I am not in a hurry .. and I can use more vacations :-P. The OS2 port does workarounds in the exact same place. The BSD patch is ugly(tm) and in addition to breaking other platforms, it may cause integration issues later on, so I'll just wait for the gnumake4 stuff to see where we are standing instead of reinventing the wheel. > Have a nice weekend Pedro > And don't worry.. I won't miss the fun in the archives... as certain Assange says: we're all being watched ;-). Pedro.
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On 12/2/11 4:44 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 12/2/11 4:01 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hello; --- Ven 2/12/11, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto: ... You should remove the whole target. i stumbled over the same problem and have already checked in a fix. There were some more place where broffice was referenced and have cleaned up this. Maybe we can agree that we build at least on one platform before we commit changes ;-) Yup, this is a definite consequence of my build not getting that far (yet). We do have some patches now to complete the build but they are not in commitable shape. I think I will go on vacations until the gnumake4 cws is committed. thinking about this statement..., no i will not ask further questions i will forget it ;-) Have a nice weekend Pedro Juergen In other words: I will unsubscribe from the list and rest for a while :). no, i don't believe that you will really unsubscribe, you will miss all the fun we have here on the list ;-) Juergen
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On 12/2/11 4:01 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hello; --- Ven 2/12/11, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto: ... You should remove the whole target. i stumbled over the same problem and have already checked in a fix. There were some more place where broffice was referenced and have cleaned up this. Maybe we can agree that we build at least on one platform before we commit changes ;-) Yup, this is a definite consequence of my build not getting that far (yet). We do have some patches now to complete the build but they are not in commitable shape. I think I will go on vacations until the gnumake4 cws is committed. In other words: I will unsubscribe from the list and rest for a while :). no, i don't believe that you will really unsubscribe, you will miss all the fun we have here on the list ;-) Juergen
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Hello; --- Ven 2/12/11, Jürgen Schmidt ha scritto: ... > > You should remove the whole target. > > > i stumbled over the same problem and have already checked > in a fix. > There were some more place where broffice was referenced > and have > cleaned up this. > > Maybe we can agree that we build at least on one platform > before we commit changes ;-) > Yup, this is a definite consequence of my build not getting that far (yet). We do have some patches now to complete the build but they are not in commitable shape. I think I will go on vacations until the gnumake4 cws is committed. In other words: I will unsubscribe from the list and rest for a while :). cheers, Pedro.
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On 12/2/11 8:12 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
Hi Pedro,
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 07:09:57PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Andrew and guys;
By the place where the automated build is failing I think this
was caused by the BrOffice removal:
may be not, the buildbot is failing since rev 1206967 according
to http://ci.apache.org/builders/openofficeorg-nightly
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1207925
but instead of reverting I would prefer we take this chance
to find out how to get useful information from the build
(a log).
Sure this breaks in every platform:
dmake: makefile.mk: line 231: Error: -- Missing targets or attributes in rule
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/makefile.mk?r1=1162288&r2=1207925&diff_format=h#l231
by removing broffice_$i from
$(foreach,i,$(alllangiso) broffice_$i) : $$@{$(PKGFORMAT:^".")}
you are creating a target for every language (en-US the default) that
does not exist. Instead of broffice_en-US you get en-US.
You should remove the whole target.
i stumbled over the same problem and have already checked in a fix.
There were some more place where broffice was referenced and have
cleaned up this.
Maybe we can agree that we build at least on one platform before we
commit changes ;-)
Juergen
Regards
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Hi Pedro,
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 07:09:57PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hi Andrew and guys;
>
> By the place where the automated build is failing I think this
> was caused by the BrOffice removal:
may be not, the buildbot is failing since rev 1206967 according
to http://ci.apache.org/builders/openofficeorg-nightly
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1207925
>
> but instead of reverting I would prefer we take this chance
> to find out how to get useful information from the build
> (a log).
Sure this breaks in every platform:
dmake: makefile.mk: line 231: Error: -- Missing targets or attributes in rule
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util/makefile.mk?r1=1162288&r2=1207925&diff_format=h#l231
by removing broffice_$i from
$(foreach,i,$(alllangiso) broffice_$i) : $$@{$(PKGFORMAT:^".")}
you are creating a target for every language (en-US the default) that
does not exist. Instead of broffice_en-US you get en-US.
You should remove the whole target.
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
pgpKipoCrY6FU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Hi Andrew and guys; By the place where the automated build is failing I think this was caused by the BrOffice removal: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1207925 but instead of reverting I would prefer we take this chance to find out how to get useful information from the build (a log). cheers, Pedro.
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 05:57:16PM -0800, Andrew Rist wrote: > > > On 12/1/2011 5:43 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > >Hi Andrew, > > > >On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 05:10:15PM -0800, Andrew Rist wrote: > >>Quick update on the Apache OpenOffice nightly build. > >> > >>We now have our own nightly build (yay) and you can see the results > >>at [1] with the latest build at [2]. > >>Unfortunately, as you can see at that link, after a string in > >>successful builds, the build has now been broken for several days. > >>The log is available at [3] and the final message in the log file is: > >> > >>1 module(s): > >>instsetoo_native > >>need(s) to be rebuilt > >> > >>Reason(s): > >> > >>ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making > >> /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly/build/main/instsetoo_native/util > >> > >>When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build > >> by running: > >> > >>build --from instsetoo_native > >>program finished with exit code 1 > >>elapsedTime=3337.166106 > >> > >>Any help debugging this would be appreciated. > >the build is started with --html, this means the more verbose output is > >redirected to a folder//misc/logs/.txt > yes it is > > > >In order to get the exact error, you should access > > > >instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/misc/logs/util.txt > it's easy to get single files and add to build page - are there > other specific files that would be useful? usually, you look at that log file and it may point to another log in a logging folder, depending on what it was building. Let's suppose it was building rpms in the OpenOffice target for the fr locale, it will point to the log instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/OpenOffice/rpm/logging/fr/log_DEV300_fr.log the structure is: instsetoo_nativelogging//log_DEV300_.log like: nstsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice/rpm/logging/en-US/log_DEV300_en-US.log nstsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice_SDK/deb/logging/en-US/log_DEV300_en-US.log instsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice_languagepack/installed/logging/en-US/log_DEV300_en-US.log ... Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpp1h8rm2U0o.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On 12/1/2011 5:43 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: Hi Andrew, On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 05:10:15PM -0800, Andrew Rist wrote: Quick update on the Apache OpenOffice nightly build. We now have our own nightly build (yay) and you can see the results at [1] with the latest build at [2]. Unfortunately, as you can see at that link, after a string in successful builds, the build has now been broken for several days. The log is available at [3] and the final message in the log file is: 1 module(s): instsetoo_native need(s) to be rebuilt Reason(s): ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly/build/main/instsetoo_native/util When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by running: build --from instsetoo_native program finished with exit code 1 elapsedTime=3337.166106 Any help debugging this would be appreciated. the build is started with --html, this means the more verbose output is redirected to a folder//misc/logs/.txt yes it is In order to get the exact error, you should access instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/misc/logs/util.txt it's easy to get single files and add to build page - are there other specific files that would be useful? otherwise it is quite impossible to guess what's happening. Regards -- Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect OracleCorporate Architecture Group Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Hi Andrew, On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 05:10:15PM -0800, Andrew Rist wrote: > Quick update on the Apache OpenOffice nightly build. > > We now have our own nightly build (yay) and you can see the results > at [1] with the latest build at [2]. > Unfortunately, as you can see at that link, after a string in > successful builds, the build has now been broken for several days. > The log is available at [3] and the final message in the log file is: > >1 module(s): > instsetoo_native >need(s) to be rebuilt > >Reason(s): > >ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making > /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly/build/main/instsetoo_native/util > >When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by > running: > > build --from instsetoo_native >program finished with exit code 1 >elapsedTime=3337.166106 > > Any help debugging this would be appreciated. the build is started with --html, this means the more verbose output is redirected to a folder //misc/logs/.txt In order to get the exact error, you should access instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/misc/logs/util.txt otherwise it is quite impossible to guess what's happening. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpp4ENDN1T3Q.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Quick update on the Apache OpenOffice nightly build. We now have our own nightly build (yay) and you can see the results at [1] with the latest build at [2]. Unfortunately, as you can see at that link, after a string in successful builds, the build has now been broken for several days. The log is available at [3] and the final message in the log file is: 1 module(s): instsetoo_native need(s) to be rebuilt Reason(s): ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly/build/main/instsetoo_native/util When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by running: build --from instsetoo_native program finished with exit code 1 elapsedTime=3337.166106 Any help debugging this would be appreciated. I am assuming this is related to the make scripts, etc. as process for the build predated the dmake changes. Current plans are: * begin working on Win and Mac build (infra is laready playing with win build) * add RAT code check * store full log set * store install bits (hopefully just keep latest copy) * add testing (suggestions??) * add code analysis (suggestions??) For now, though, I'm just hoping to get the build working again... Andrew [1] http://ci.apache.org/builders/openofficeorg-nightly [2] http://ci.apache.org/builders/openofficeorg-nightly/builds/8 [3] http://ci.apache.org/builders/openofficeorg-nightly/builds/8/steps/shell/logs/stdio On 11/14/2011 6:58 PM, Andrew Rist wrote: On 11/14/2011 5:20 PM, Rob Weir wrote: It looks like we have several options, described here: http://ci.apache.org/ Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should use? Although getting this to work across multiple platforms will be a big effort, we don't need to do it all at once. Getting a single platform up and running would not be very difficult, for example Buildbot with Linux. And we would benefit from even that. For example, this would enable non-developers to grab builds to test. As you've probably noticed, we've had a few people ask how they could help with testing. But without builds the only ones who can test are those who can build AOOo themselves. I'm poking around at the doc here: http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org list. But I could really use some help to move this forward. So, if you are interested in helping, let me know. Thanks! -Rob I've already gotten started on this and opened a Jira issue for creating a Linux nightly on buildbot. I have checked in a preliminary linux build script and I was working on the patch to the buildbot cfg for AOO. I was going to initially run the build, RAT, and some code analysis. Later I was going to attempt to run QA tests also. There has been discussion of working on the Mac build, and other options are a Windows nightly (obviously) and perhaps a Solaris build. Andrew
RE: Is it time for a build machine?
> -Original Message- > From: Mathias Bauer [mailto:mathias_ba...@gmx.net] > Sent: Wednesday, 16 November 2011 8:11 AM > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Is it time for a build machine? > > As much as I liked the old build bots and used them a lot, the whole setup > and their overall usage was far from what Hudson/Jenkins can deliver. I would love you to explain please what Jenkins can do that Buildbot can not from your POV, thanks. Gav... > > So I maintain my point that there is nothing we can use and starting with a > new setup and new hardware is better. > > YMMV > > Regards, > Mathias > > Am 15.11.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Christian Lohmaier : > > > Hi *, > > > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Mathias Bauer > wrote: > >> On 15.11.2011 04:36, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >>> > >>> Just wondering, > >>> > >>> Perhaps the older OOo at SUN/Oracle also had some setup for > >>> hudson/jenkins that we could reuse? > >> > >> No, unfortunately OOo never embraced continuous integration and all > >> the other wonderful things you can build around it. > > > > There have been both tinderbox as well as buildbot available and in > > use in the OOo project. > > Tinderbox did keep track of commits, did flag build-results as "dirty" > > when there were commits after the last build started, and thus allowed > > rebuilding when a cws was touched, and (some) buildbots were > > autotriggered by watching the commit-mailinglist, so they as well did > > built whenever the code was changed. > > That the build-results have often been ignored by the corresponding > > developers is a different story. But stating that there was no such > > thing is, well, typical. > > > > ciao > > Christian
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
As much as I liked the old build bots and used them a lot, the whole setup and their overall usage was far from what Hudson/Jenkins can deliver. So I maintain my point that there is nothing we can use and starting with a new setup and new hardware is better. YMMV Regards, Mathias Am 15.11.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Christian Lohmaier : > Hi *, > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote: >> On 15.11.2011 04:36, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >>> >>> Just wondering, >>> >>> Perhaps the older OOo at SUN/Oracle also had some >>> setup for hudson/jenkins that we could reuse? >> >> No, unfortunately OOo never embraced continuous integration and all the >> other wonderful things you can build around it. > > There have been both tinderbox as well as buildbot available and in > use in the OOo project. > Tinderbox did keep track of commits, did flag build-results as "dirty" > when there were commits after the last build started, and thus allowed > rebuilding when a cws was touched, and (some) buildbots were > autotriggered by watching the commit-mailinglist, so they as well did > built whenever the code was changed. > That the build-results have often been ignored by the corresponding > developers is a different story. But stating that there was no such > thing is, well, typical. > > ciao > Christian
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Hi *, On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote: > On 15.11.2011 04:36, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> >> Just wondering, >> >> Perhaps the older OOo at SUN/Oracle also had some >> setup for hudson/jenkins that we could reuse? > > No, unfortunately OOo never embraced continuous integration and all the > other wonderful things you can build around it. There have been both tinderbox as well as buildbot available and in use in the OOo project. Tinderbox did keep track of commits, did flag build-results as "dirty" when there were commits after the last build started, and thus allowed rebuilding when a cws was touched, and (some) buildbots were autotriggered by watching the commit-mailinglist, so they as well did built whenever the code was changed. That the build-results have often been ignored by the corresponding developers is a different story. But stating that there was no such thing is, well, typical. ciao Christian
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Andrew Rist wrote: > On 11/14/2011 5:20 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >> >> It looks like we have several options, described here: >> http://ci.apache.org/ >> >> Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should use? >> >> Although getting this to work across multiple platforms will be a big >> effort, we don't need to do it all at once. Getting a single >> platform up and running would not be very difficult, for example >> Buildbot with Linux. And we would benefit from even that. For >> example, this would enable non-developers to grab builds to test. As >> you've probably noticed, we've had a few people ask how they could >> help with testing. But without builds the only ones who can test are >> those who can build AOOo themselves. >> >> I'm poking around at the doc here: >> http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html >> >> I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org list. >> >> But I could really use some help to move this forward. So, if you are >> interested in helping, let me know. >> >> Thanks! >> >> -Rob > > I've already gotten started on this and opened a Jira issue for creating a > Linux nightly on buildbot. > I have checked in a preliminary linux build script and I was working on the > patch to the buildbot cfg for AOO. > I was going to initially run the build, RAT, and some code analysis. Later > I was going to attempt to run QA tests also. > There has been discussion of working on the Mac build, and other options are > a Windows nightly (obviously) and perhaps a Solaris build. > This sounds like a good plan. I saw your script in the JIRA issue. Would it be worth doing an svn update rather than a fresh checkout each time? (A full checkout can take 40 minutes). Or does that break a rule about storing state on buildbot slaves? > Andrew > >
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On 15.11.2011 04:36, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Just wondering, Perhaps the older OOo at SUN/Oracle also had some setup for hudson/jenkins that we could reuse? No, unfortunately OOo never embraced continuous integration and all the other wonderful things you can build around it. Our builds where done in a mixture of a strange home-made build server and manual actions, and code was not allowed to get in before it passed an approval chain (before you ask: no, it wasn't based on code reviews). I hope nobody will ever try to reuse that. Regards, Mathias
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Ah, On 14 November 2011 22:59, Ross Gardler wrote: > Sorry, my jetlag made me miss the "were" in the above sentence. > > Ignore my comment. And I was multitasking too much, while listening to dreary news reports about those with so much more money (and so little social consciousness) than we'll ever see. Louis
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Ross, On 14 November 2011 21:44, Ross Gardler wrote: > All services currently hosted by Oracle will be turned off at some point. > OpenOffice.org now belongs to the Apache Software Foundation. It is our > responsibility to provide what the PPMC requests of us, wherever possible, > to keep the project running. Wherever possible this will be the same > facilities we provide for all other ASF projects. However, the PPMC is free > to request other facilities if they are required. I see I was not clear enough; apologies. I meant that we were following certain rather good (as in producing good stuff) protocols in the OpenOffice.org project related to, among other things, releases. My point had nothing to do with equipment or technological services provided by any megacorporation, let alone Oracle :-). It had to do with process. Louis
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On 14 November 2011 18:44, Ross Gardler wrote: > Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. > > On Nov 15, 2011 2:18 AM, "Louis Suárez-Potts" > wrote: >> >> Have you looked at what we were doing in OOo? > > Errr This is OOo, right here. I'm not sure I understand your question. Sorry, my jetlag made me miss the "were" in the above sentence. Ignore my comment. Ross
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Just wondering, Perhaps the older OOo at SUN/Oracle also had some setup for hudson/jenkins that we could reuse? cheers, Pedro. --- On Mon, 11/14/11, Andrew Rist wrote: > On 11/14/2011 5:20 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > > It looks like we have several options, described > here: http://ci.apache.org/ > > > > Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should > use? > > > > Although getting this to work across multiple > platforms will be a big > > effort, we don't need to do it all at > once. Getting a single > > platform up and running would not be very difficult, > for example > > Buildbot with Linux. And we would benefit from even > that. For > > example, this would enable non-developers to grab > builds to test. As > > you've probably noticed, we've had a few people ask > how they could > > help with testing. But without builds the only > ones who can test are > > those who can build AOOo themselves. > > > > I'm poking around at the doc here: > > http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html > > > > I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org > list. > > > > But I could really use some help to move this > forward. So, if you are > > interested in helping, let me know. > > > > Thanks! > > > > -Rob > I've already gotten started on this and opened a Jira issue > for creating > a Linux nightly on buildbot. > I have checked in a preliminary linux build script and I > was working on > the patch to the buildbot cfg for AOO. > I was going to initially run the build, RAT, and some code > analysis. > Later I was going to attempt to run QA tests also. > There has been discussion of working on the Mac build, and > other options > are a Windows nightly (obviously) and perhaps a Solaris > build. > > Andrew > >
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On 11/14/2011 5:20 PM, Rob Weir wrote: It looks like we have several options, described here: http://ci.apache.org/ Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should use? Although getting this to work across multiple platforms will be a big effort, we don't need to do it all at once. Getting a single platform up and running would not be very difficult, for example Buildbot with Linux. And we would benefit from even that. For example, this would enable non-developers to grab builds to test. As you've probably noticed, we've had a few people ask how they could help with testing. But without builds the only ones who can test are those who can build AOOo themselves. I'm poking around at the doc here: http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org list. But I could really use some help to move this forward. So, if you are interested in helping, let me know. Thanks! -Rob I've already gotten started on this and opened a Jira issue for creating a Linux nightly on buildbot. I have checked in a preliminary linux build script and I was working on the patch to the buildbot cfg for AOO. I was going to initially run the build, RAT, and some code analysis. Later I was going to attempt to run QA tests also. There has been discussion of working on the Mac build, and other options are a Windows nightly (obviously) and perhaps a Solaris build. Andrew
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Nov 15, 2011 2:18 AM, "Louis Suárez-Potts" wrote: > > Have you looked at what we were doing in OOo? Errr This is OOo, right here. I'm not sure I understand your question. > If still up, you can see the releases notes and also the relevant > tools.openoffice.org project pages, as well as qa.openoffice.org > > Am in wrong in believing it's good not to throw out the baby with the > bathwater….? All services currently hosted by Oracle will be turned off at some point. OpenOffice.org now belongs to the Apache Software Foundation. It is our responsibility to provide what the PPMC requests of us, wherever possible, to keep the project running. Wherever possible this will be the same facilities we provide for all other ASF projects. However, the PPMC is free to request other facilities if they are required. Ross > > Louis > > > On 14 November 2011 20:41, Rob Weir wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Gavin McDonald wrote: > >> > >> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] > >>> Sent: Tuesday, 15 November 2011 11:21 AM > >>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org > >>> Subject: Is it time for a build machine? > >>> > >>> It looks like we have several options, described here: http://ci.apache.org/ > >>> > >>> Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should use? > >>> > >>> Although getting this to work across multiple platforms will be a big > >>> effort, we don't need to do it all at once. Getting a single > >>> platform up and running would not be very difficult, for example Buildbot > >>> with Linux. And we would benefit from even that. For example, this would > >>> enable non-developers to grab builds to test. As you've probably noticed, > >>> we've had a few people ask how they could help with testing. But without > >>> builds the only ones who can test are those who can build AOOo themselves. > >>> > >>> I'm poking around at the doc here: > >>> http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html > >>> > >>> I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org list. > >>> > >>> But I could really use some help to move this forward. So, if you are > >>> interested in helping, let me know. > >> > >> Note an issue has already been created. > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4086 > >> > > > > OK. One step ahead of me. That's a good place to be ;-) > > > >> Not sure if your thinking is the same as Andrews. > >> > > > > Very close, at least for the core build part. > > > >> Gav... > >> > >>> > >>> Thanks! > >>> > >>> -Rob > >> > >> > >
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
Have you looked at what we were doing in OOo? If still up, you can see the releases notes and also the relevant tools.openoffice.org project pages, as well as qa.openoffice.org Am in wrong in believing it's good not to throw out the baby with the bathwater….? Louis On 14 November 2011 20:41, Rob Weir wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Gavin McDonald > wrote: >> >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] >>> Sent: Tuesday, 15 November 2011 11:21 AM >>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org >>> Subject: Is it time for a build machine? >>> >>> It looks like we have several options, described here: >>> http://ci.apache.org/ >>> >>> Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should use? >>> >>> Although getting this to work across multiple platforms will be a big >>> effort, we don't need to do it all at once. Getting a single >>> platform up and running would not be very difficult, for example Buildbot >>> with Linux. And we would benefit from even that. For example, this would >>> enable non-developers to grab builds to test. As you've probably noticed, >>> we've had a few people ask how they could help with testing. But without >>> builds the only ones who can test are those who can build AOOo themselves. >>> >>> I'm poking around at the doc here: >>> http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html >>> >>> I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org list. >>> >>> But I could really use some help to move this forward. So, if you are >>> interested in helping, let me know. >> >> Note an issue has already been created. >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4086 >> > > OK. One step ahead of me. That's a good place to be ;-) > >> Not sure if your thinking is the same as Andrews. >> > > Very close, at least for the core build part. > >> Gav... >> >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> -Rob >> >> >
Re: Is it time for a build machine?
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Gavin McDonald wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, 15 November 2011 11:21 AM >> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Is it time for a build machine? >> >> It looks like we have several options, described here: >> http://ci.apache.org/ >> >> Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should use? >> >> Although getting this to work across multiple platforms will be a big >> effort, we don't need to do it all at once. Getting a single >> platform up and running would not be very difficult, for example Buildbot >> with Linux. And we would benefit from even that. For example, this would >> enable non-developers to grab builds to test. As you've probably noticed, >> we've had a few people ask how they could help with testing. But without >> builds the only ones who can test are those who can build AOOo themselves. >> >> I'm poking around at the doc here: >> http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html >> >> I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org list. >> >> But I could really use some help to move this forward. So, if you are >> interested in helping, let me know. > > Note an issue has already been created. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4086 > OK. One step ahead of me. That's a good place to be ;-) > Not sure if your thinking is the same as Andrews. > Very close, at least for the core build part. > Gav... > >> >> Thanks! >> >> -Rob > >
RE: Is it time for a build machine?
> -Original Message- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] > Sent: Tuesday, 15 November 2011 11:21 AM > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Is it time for a build machine? > > It looks like we have several options, described here: http://ci.apache.org/ > > Does anyone have an opinion on which one we should use? > > Although getting this to work across multiple platforms will be a big > effort, we don't need to do it all at once. Getting a single > platform up and running would not be very difficult, for example Buildbot > with Linux. And we would benefit from even that. For example, this would > enable non-developers to grab builds to test. As you've probably noticed, > we've had a few people ask how they could help with testing. But without > builds the only ones who can test are those who can build AOOo themselves. > > I'm poking around at the doc here: > http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html > > I've also signed up for the bui...@apache.org list. > > But I could really use some help to move this forward. So, if you are > interested in helping, let me know. Note an issue has already been created. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4086 Not sure if your thinking is the same as Andrews. Gav... > > Thanks! > > -Rob
