Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Sep 17, 2012, at 18:13, Dan Ports wrote: >> I don't see how that takes more time than it did before – the rebuild >> was needed anyway and the buildbot would have done it anyway: Either >> because rev-upgrade detected broken linkage, or because somebody >> commited a revbump. Remember, there's

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Dan Ports
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:45:40AM +0200, Clemens Lang wrote: > We are in control of that, so it's entirely our decision whether a > revbump is our only way to ensure users rebuild. I think the way I'd prefer to handle this would be to have the buildbot produce a list of ports that need to be revb

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread William Siegrist
On Sep 17, 2012, at 7:34 AM, William Siegrist wrote: > I will be migrating the buildbot master (build.macports.org) at 1pm PDT > today. The website will be down, and no builds will be possible during that > time. Afterwards, I will trigger builds for any commits that came in during > the downt

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Clemens Lang
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 03:35:55PM -0700, Dan Ports wrote: > Could we use a modified rev-upgrade to track the library dependencies > of all installed archives, not just active ones? Then we could have > the buildbot scan all ports for broken files and indicate what needs > to be revbumped. Yes, we

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Clemens Lang
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 04:32:36PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > I don't think we ever want to stop revbumping ports. Not everyone has > rev-upgrade turned on, so increasing the revision is the only way to > ensure people rebuild. Having an automated way to revbump all affected > ports would be good

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Dan Ports
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 05:41:10PM +0200, Clemens Lang wrote: > MPAB (the software running the buildbots) needs to be adapted to > activate all dependent ports one-by-one and run rev-upgrade to detect > this kind of problems. Could we use a modified rev-upgrade to track the library dependencies of

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Sep 17, 2012, at 16:24, Clemens Lang wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 04:08:21PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> And *that* would probably put too much strain on the buildbots. It >> already sometimes takes them hours to build a certain set of ports. >> (Whenever I update the php port, for exampl

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Clemens Lang
Hi, On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 04:08:21PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > And *that* would probably put too much strain on the buildbots. It > already sometimes takes them hours to build a certain set of ports. > (Whenever I update the php port, for example.) I see no other way to have the buildbot aut

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Sep 17, 2012, at 10:41, Clemens Lang wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:27:49AM -0400, Craig Treleaven wrote: >> One of the hoped-for benefits of developing my port was that the >> buildbots would rebuild it each time a dependency changed and that I'd >> be notified of any failed builds. >

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Clemens Lang
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:36:51AM -0400, Craig Treleaven wrote: > Is the maintainer notified of failures? Yes. On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:27:49AM -0400, Craig Treleaven wrote: > One of the hoped-for benefits of developing my port was that the > buildbots would rebuild it each time a dependency c

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
> Is the maintainer notified of failures? I've never seen such but maybe I'm > just batting 1.000 still? ;) I believe it's a combination of who submitted a change and the maintainers get emailed on build failure. Having non-distributable binaries is not considered an error. _

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Craig Treleaven
At 11:32 AM -0400 9/17/12, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: > Been meaning to ask...I'm a newbie maintainer. One of the hoped-for benefits of developing my port was that the buildbots would rebuild it each time a dependency changed and that I'd be notified of any failed builds. Alas, I found at the en

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
> Been meaning to ask...I'm a newbie maintainer. One of the hoped-for benefits > of developing my port was that the buildbots would rebuild it each time a > dependency changed and that I'd be notified of any failed builds. Alas, I > found at the end that a license conflict means that binaries

Re: Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread Craig Treleaven
At 7:34 AM -0700 9/17/12, William Siegrist wrote: I will be migrating the buildbot master (build.macports.org) at 1pm PDT today. The website will be down, and no builds will be possible during that time. Afterwards, I will trigger builds for any commits that came in during the downtime. Been

Server Migration: buildbot

2012-09-17 Thread William Siegrist
I will be migrating the buildbot master (build.macports.org) at 1pm PDT today. The website will be down, and no builds will be possible during that time. Afterwards, I will trigger builds for any commits that came in during the downtime. -Bill ___ m