On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Eloy Duran wrote:
> I liked the idea of sending the email to the commit author, as Hudson
> apparently does as described by Joris. And as I do share concerns
> about the robustness of the Rails code, I wrote a patch for
> CruiseControl to be able to do the same:
>
> I apologize if anything I said seemed insulting or disrespectful - I
> would never be my intention.
>
> --
> Cezary Bagiński
There's no need for that as far as I can tell. We we're just having a
discussion :)
Eloy
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this messa
I liked the idea of sending the email to the commit author, as Hudson
apparently does as described by Joris. And as I do share concerns
about the robustness of the Rails code, I wrote a patch for
CruiseControl to be able to do the same:
http://github.com/alloy/cruisecontrol.rb/commit/b2be91
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 12:52:10PM -0700, Chad Woolley wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Czarek wrote:
> > Perhaps a timeout within which the build should be fixed? I mean it
> > doesn't take hours for CI to detect the problem. And then mail if fix
> > doesn't come in time.
>
> That's
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 12:52:10PM -0700, Chad Woolley wrote:
>
> > I don't believe committers will want to create and subscribe to a
> > separate list. And this is *their* mailing list. Then again, the rest
> > of us may want to know if we should "pull" or not.
>
> If the rails core list isn't
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Czarek wrote:
> Perhaps a timeout within which the build should be fixed? I mean it
> doesn't take hours for CI to detect the problem. And then mail if fix
> doesn't come in time.
That's a good idea. How about this:
1. The first three red builds notify only the
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 02:02:46PM -0400, Mateo Murphy wrote:
>
>
> On 4-Sep-09, at 12:55 PM, Chad Woolley wrote:
>
> > However, not fixing the build promptly is a problem, and one of the
> > reasons I wanted to reinstate notifications to this list.
> >
> > On a large/distributed project like R
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 09:55:39AM -0700, Chad Woolley wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Eloy Duran wrote:
>
> Thanks for the feedback, everyone. FWIW, this is not new, build
> failures used to go to this list [1]
How about a two stage commit. If CI repo works, then commit to main
re
On 4-Sep-09, at 12:55 PM, Chad Woolley wrote:
> However, not fixing the build promptly is a problem, and one of the
> reasons I wanted to reinstate notifications to this list.
>
> On a large/distributed project like Rails - especially one where many
> people run the master branch live in their p
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Eloy Duran wrote:
> I wouldn't be bothered by these CI emails if we'd see one every now
> and then. But nowadays, it seems like every other build is broken.
> That's the real problem here.
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. FWIW, this is not new, build
failures u
We use hudson, and we're very happy with it.
It can be configured to only email to the person who broke the build.
Aside from that, the annoying part is indeed that the build is broken
every hour.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 16:11, Eloy Duran wrote:
>
> Hey Ken,
>
> Sure it's 2 seconds of work to set
Hey Ken,
Sure it's 2 seconds of work to setup a mail filter, but so is signing
up for a specialized mailing list. So that doesn't make it a good
reason.
I wouldn't be bothered by these CI emails if we'd see one every now
and then. But nowadays, it seems like every other build is broken.
I agree with Rob that this list is the right place for it. It's easy
for individuals to "opt out" by setting up a mail filter. Takes 2
seconds.
- Ken
On Sep 4, 2009, at 9:04 AM, Rob Biedenharn wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 4, 2009, at 8:57 AM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009
Argh, obviously I meant "here".
On Sep 4, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Eloy Duran wrote:
> Dude,
>
> This is a list for discussions, and I'm hear to see if people might
> have problems with code that I wrote for Rails, not for fun.
> Please take your patronizing comments to the playground, you have
> a
Dude,
This is a list for discussions, and I'm hear to see if people might
have problems with code that I wrote for Rails, not for fun.
Please take your patronizing comments to the playground, you have
added 0.0 to this discussion.
Eloy
On Sep 4, 2009, at 3:04 PM, Rob Biedenharn wrote:
>
>
On Sep 4, 2009, at 8:57 AM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Eloy Duran
> wrote:
>>
>> I tend to print them out, beat them with a stick before I set them on
>> fire, unfortunately gmail was unable to automate this process for me.
>>
>> Seriously though, I think yo
+1
2009/9/4 Nicolás Sanguinetti :
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Eloy Duran wrote:
>>
>> I tend to print them out, beat them with a stick before I set them on
>> fire, unfortunately gmail was unable to automate this process for me.
>>
>> Seriously though, I think you're right Mike. Actuall
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Eloy Duran wrote:
>
> I tend to print them out, beat them with a stick before I set them on
> fire, unfortunately gmail was unable to automate this process for me.
>
> Seriously though, I think you're right Mike. Actually, I can assure
> you I know of at least a few
I tend to print them out, beat them with a stick before I set them on
fire, unfortunately gmail was unable to automate this process for me.
Seriously though, I think you're right Mike. Actually, I can assure
you I know of at least a few people who have unsubscribed from the
list because of
On Sep 4, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
> "Don't forget the build is broken", thus, spam you with emails until
> someone drags his ass over and fixes the build
The problem with the "spam emails" approach is that people will treat
them as spam. I don't know what the answer is, bu
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Mislav
Marohnić wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 19:32, Chad Woolley wrote:
>>
>> 3. Help fix the build :)
>
> If there are three commits—A, B and C, where A breaks the build and B,C are
> unrelated—I'm wondering why should CI send out emails for errors in B and C
>
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 19:32, Chad Woolley wrote:
>
> 3. Help fix the build :)
>
If there are three commits—A, B and C, where A breaks the build and B,C are
unrelated—I'm wondering why should CI send out emails for errors in B and C
when it detected them in A.
In other words, CI should never re
On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 10:32:35AM -0700, Chad Woolley wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Czarek <[1]cezary.bagin...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
> Am I overreacting or is anyone else a tiny bit annoyed by the size of
> these emails? If you're mobile with a GSM card out of UTMS ra
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Czarek wrote:
> Am I overreacting or is anyone else a tiny bit annoyed by the size of
> these emails? If you're mobile with a GSM card out of UTMS range , you
> have around 4-8kB/s, and 70kB per mail is a noticeable wait.
>
> The summary at the top is fine, but I
24 matches
Mail list logo
