Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2751 On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:04, Antoine Toulme wrote: > Oh ok. Hudson only sends emails when build is failing OR on the first build > where the build is successful again. > > So it should be less noise hopefully. > > > On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:01,

Buildr CI on Windows - Build # 8 - Still Failing!

Buildr CI on Windows - Build # 8 - Still Failing: Full build log: ${BUILD_LOG, 1}

Buildr CI on Windows - Build # 7 - Still Failing!

Buildr CI on Windows - Build # 7 - Still Failing: Full build log: [...truncated 3865 lines...] D:/Documents and Settings/Administrator/.hudson/jobs/Buildr CI on Windows/workspace/lib/buildr/core/application.rb:622:in `invoke_with_call_chain' D:/Documents and Settings/Administrator/.hudson/jobs/Bu

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

Oh ok. Hudson only sends emails when build is failing OR on the first build where the build is successful again. So it should be less noise hopefully. On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:01, Daniel Spiewak wrote: > > Hey, you're not going to not read those emails, are you :) ? > > > > I don't even read

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

> Hey, you're not going to not read those emails, are you :) ? > I don't even read the CI emails from our server at Novell! (unless the build is failing because of one of my commits, but then I have filters to catch that case) I'm not big on the whole CI spam thing. I know it's useful for a lot

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

Hey, you're not going to not read those emails, are you :) ? Yes, I will ask for the creation of a new list. That might not happen before a week though. On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 10:50, Daniel Spiewak wrote: > I second the motion. Gmail filters work wonders, but it's still extra > trouble. > > D

Re: spec 'should not touch target directory unless running'?

sleep 1 should cut it (it's in seconds). Go go go! On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 10:02, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt < pepijn.vaneeckho...@luciad.com> wrote: > First failure I checked was this one: > > it 'should not touch target directory unless running' do >mkpath 'target' ; File.utime @early, @early, '

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

I second the motion. Gmail filters work wonders, but it's still extra trouble. Daniel On May 28, 2010, at 12:43 PM, "Charles Oliver Nutter" > wrote: Can you maybe pipe these to another list and have people opt-in? If there's going to be a continuous stream of Hudson build emails, I'll prob

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

Can you maybe pipe these to another list and have people opt-in? If there's going to be a continuous stream of Hudson build emails, I'll probably drop off the buildr dev list. On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 2:08 AM, wrote: > See > > Ch

spec 'should not touch target directory unless running'?

First failure I checked was this one: it 'should not touch target directory unless running' do mkpath 'target' ; File.utime @early, @early, 'target' @filter.from('src').into('target').exclude('*').run File.mtime('target').should be_close(@early, 10) end Can this ever work? On many sy

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

Ok. I've run the specs and I'm getting 31 failures now on Windows XP. I'll have a look at them next week. Pepijn On 28/5/2010 18:46, Antoine Toulme wrote: Win XP or Win 7 have failures. How much they overlap is yet to be determined... but if you get to fix _anything_ on Windows, that's a great

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

Win XP or Win 7 have failures. How much they overlap is yet to be determined... but if you get to fix _anything_ on Windows, that's a great step. We're not far from having everything in check. On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 09:41, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt < pepijn.vaneeckho...@luciad.com> wrote: > Still sp

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

Still specific to Windows 7 or just Windows in general? Pepijn On 28/5/2010 18:01, Antoine Toulme wrote: I will install Scala on the Windows machine and will change the message to get the full build log. On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 00:08, wrote: See

Re: Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

I will install Scala on the Windows machine and will change the message to get the full build log. On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 00:08, wrote: > See > > Changes: > > [toulmean] partial fix for BUILDR-445: relax rspec dependency > > --

Re: Overview of issues blocking 1.4.0 release

Hi Pepjin, we have spec failures on Windows, and it looks like we reproduce 2 spec failures with jruby on ubuntu. We have nightly builds on Windows, can you see my email with the failures ? On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 02:18, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt < pepijn.vaneeckho...@luciad.com> wrote: > Which issu

Build failed in Hudson: buildr-ci-build-jruby #5

See Changes: [toulmean] modifying bdd specs to allow for an easier spotting of errors. Looks like they don't pass on the CI build. -- [...truncated 3492 lines...]  at ruby.

Build failed in Hudson: buildr-ci-build-jruby #4

See -- [...truncated 3534 lines...]  at org.jruby.internal.runtime.methods.DefaultMethod.call(DefaultMethod.java:156)  at org.jruby.runtime.callsite.CachingCallSite.cacheA

Build failed in Hudson: buildr-ci-build-jruby #3

See Changes: [toulmean] partial fix for BUILDR-445: relax rspec dependency -- [...truncated 3530 lines...]  at org.jruby.internal.runtime.methods.DefaultMethod.call(DefaultM

Build failed in Hudson: buildr-ci-build-jruby #2

See -- [...truncated 3626 lines...] - should not change existing list of sources - should include as classpath dependency - should compile a simple .scala file into a .class file - should p

Re: Overview of issues blocking 1.4.0 release

Applying the patch in BUILDR-447 would squash quite an annoying bug :) On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt wrote: > Which issues are still blocking the 1.4.0 release? I might have some time > available to work on some of them, so I would like to know what to tackle > first. > >

Overview of issues blocking 1.4.0 release

Which issues are still blocking the 1.4.0 release? I might have some time available to work on some of them, so I would like to know what to tackle first. Regards, Pepijn

Build failed in Hudson: Buildr CI on Windows #6

See Changes: [toulmean] partial fix for BUILDR-445: relax rspec dependency -- [...truncated 3862 lines...] D:/Documents and Settings/Administrator/.hudson/jobs/Buildr CI on Windows/worksp