>> Unfortunately, due to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=767501,
>> the only way to get b2g builds on try is to use '-p all'.
>
>
> Sounds like that should be a P1 for reducing load then.
Much-to-most of this "B2G-only" code compiles on other platforms, too.
Or at least, that is true
Em 30-09-2012 00:35, Pedro Bessa escreveu:
Em 15-08-2012 03:40, Benjamin Smedberg escreveu:
On 8/15/2012 2:24 AM, Pedro Bessa wrote:
Ian,
Mozilla,
I thought all fast functional programming languages were
Lisp dialects, but that's not true and you can use other fast
functional programming langu
Em 15-08-2012 03:40, Benjamin Smedberg escreveu:
On 8/15/2012 2:24 AM, Pedro Bessa wrote:
Ian,
Mozilla,
I thought all fast functional programming languages were
Lisp dialects, but that's not true and you can use other fast
functional programming languages, but now that you said
Rust, I think th
On 9/29/12 1:14 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
As part of this debate, I calculated that for patches with a
reasonable chance of success, pushing to m-i and failing actually
saves resources.
Hmm. Veering off on a bit of a tangent...
Perhaps we could find some quick load reductions by coalescing push
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Chris AtLee wrote:
> On 29/09/12 05:30 PM, Gary Kwong wrote:
>
>> I think we should have this data feed into a cronjob that emails the
>>> top ~5 weekly (ab)users of try, notifies them of their impact, and
>>> suggests ways the can help avoid using these resources
On 29/09/12 05:30 PM, Gary Kwong wrote:
I think we should have this data feed into a cronjob that emails the
top ~5 weekly (ab)users of try, notifies them of their impact, and
suggests ways the can help avoid using these resources unnecessarily.
Gavin
I agree with Gavin, the top users ought t
On 29/09/12 04:14 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
One proposal that's been made elsewhere
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791385) is to have a soft limit
of one active push per developer on try. If you try and push a 2nd time before
your previous jobs are all finished, you will be asked t
I think we should have this data feed into a cronjob that emails the
top ~5 weekly (ab)users of try, notifies them of their impact, and
suggests ways the can help avoid using these resources unnecessarily.
Gavin
I agree with Gavin, the top users ought to be educated. Currently the
top folks (
Take a look at http://people.mozilla.org/~catlee/try_pushers.html. This
is a report of people who pushed to try within 60 minutes of their
previous push since September 1. In some cases patches are clearly
unrelated, and in other cases people have cancelled their previous job
(woohoo!). There are
> If Try is hogging resources needed by Inbound, we should lower the priority
> of Try.
> Inbound is not for catching pesky WinXP-only failures. Try is.
> I'd even go as far to suggest that we should *require* a green Try run
> before allowing people to land, for everything except "simple" change
On a high level - try is a great tool and we want to make tools available
to people when they are helpful to them. That includes parallelism, which
is an important part of efficient bug hunting.
My inclination is that policy and bureaucracy are exactly the wrong
mechanisms to put around a producti
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 08:58:19AM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Sat 29 Sep 2012 07:53:36 AM PDT, Chris AtLee wrote:
> >One proposal that's been made elsewhere
> >(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791385) is to have a
> >soft limit of one active push per developer on try. If you try and
On 09/28/2012 08:49 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 05:45:00PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 05:34:09PM +0200, Honza Bambas wrote:
On 9/28/2012 12:58 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 06:45:24AM -0400, Benoit Jacob wrote:
2012/9/28 Aryeh Gregor
On Sat 29 Sep 2012 10:40:13 AM PDT, Gavin Sharp wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Chris AtLee wrote:
http://people.mozilla.org/~catlee/highscores/highscores.html is a report of
where our time on Try is going.
I think we should have this data feed into a cronjob that emails the
top ~5 we
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Chris AtLee wrote:
> http://people.mozilla.org/~catlee/highscores/highscores.html is a report of
> where our time on Try is going.
I think we should have this data feed into a cronjob that emails the
top ~5 weekly (ab)users of try, notifies them of their impact, a
On Saturday 2012-09-29 19:03 +0200, Ms2ger wrote:
> On 09/29/2012 06:07 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >I think the basic rule is that an individual developer ought to
> >break Mozilla-Inbound rarely. If a developer never breaks
> >Mozilla-Inbound, they're probably spending more extra time testing
>
On 09/29/2012 06:07 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
I think the basic rule is that an individual developer ought to
break Mozilla-Inbound rarely. If a developer never breaks
Mozilla-Inbound, they're probably spending more extra time testing
than the time they save of others interacting with Mozilla-In
On Saturday 2012-09-29 12:32 +1200, Chris Pearce wrote:
> On 28/09/12 22:42, Bobby Holley wrote:
> >Single-platform builds certainly won't catch those pesky WinXP-only
> >browser-chrome oranges. But that's what mozilla-inbound is for.
>
> Inbound is not for catching pesky WinXP-only failures. Try
On Sat 29 Sep 2012 07:53:36 AM PDT, Chris AtLee wrote:
One proposal that's been made elsewhere
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791385) is to have a
soft limit of one active push per developer on try. If you try and
push a 2nd time before your previous jobs are all finished, you will
On 9/29/12 10:53 AM, Chris AtLee wrote:
http://people.mozilla.org/~catlee/highscores/highscores.html is a report
of where our time on Try is going.
Ah, excellent. This has the answers to some of my questions from my
reply to Chris.
So there are lots of pushes on there that have b2g-only cha
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:53:36AM -0400, Chris AtLee wrote:
> On 28/09/12 09:28 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> >On 9/28/12 8:32 PM, Chris Pearce wrote:
> >>This is indeed unfortunate. However I'd prefer to add more capacity to
> >>our test infrastructure, rather than discourage developers from properl
On 28/09/12 09:28 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 9/28/12 8:32 PM, Chris Pearce wrote:
This is indeed unfortunate. However I'd prefer to add more capacity to
our test infrastructure, rather than discourage developers from properly
testing before landing.
I think the concern is the definition of "p
On Saturday 2012-09-29 17:12 +1200, Chris Pearce wrote:
> What if we only had two priorities, normal and low, along with a
> quota system?
>
> Each user gets a quota of normal priority Try pushes, and pushes
> exceeding a user's monthly quota go into the low priority pool.
>
> Then users only nee
23 matches
Mail list logo
