Yeah, the problem was it was spamming bugs with git errors. I'm going
to make it more robust so it (hopefully!) won't spam before turning it
back on.
Adam
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Osztrogonac Csaba wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Style queue dead long time ago:
>
> Style Queue
> 5 days, 16 hours
Hi All,
Style queue dead long time ago:
Style Queue
5 days, 16 hours ago
Status: Stopping Queue, reason: User terminated queue.
799 pending
Eric or Adam or anyone has access, could you kick it?
Thanks in advance.
br,
Ossy
___
webkit-dev mailing list
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Eric Seidel wrote:
> p.s. If anyone who actually likes sys-admining boxes would like to
> admin some/all of these bots, Adam and I would be happy to show you
> how. :) As you can tell, we suck at being sys-admins...
By the way, thank you for keeping these bots g
We believe the bots are all back functioning normally. (Including the
sheriff-bot, thanks to Bill Siegrist's buildbot.py fixing this
afternoon!)
Thank you for your patience.
-eric
p.s. If anyone who actually likes sys-admining boxes would like to
admin some/all of these bots, Adam and I would b
I've killed the machine in question. It's out of disk space. The bots on
that machine (style-bot, sherriff-bot, cr-linux-ews) will be down until
tomorrow.
-eric
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Darin Adler wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Eric Seidel wrote:
>
> > Sorry about the recent n
On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Eric Seidel wrote:
> Sorry about the recent noise from the style queue. Its git repo got
> corrupted. Adam and I are working on getting to the machine and resetting its
> git repo.
Is there a way to stop the noise in the meantime? I’ve received many more email
mess
Sorry about the recent noise from the style queue. It's git repo got
corrupted. Adam and I are working on getting to the machine and resetting
it's git repo.
-eric
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/
Wow. I have to admit I was skeptical. It's way too early to tell, but I
*really* like the pass messages which make my job as a reviewer much easer:
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31985#c3
Thank you very much for putting this together Adam!
-eric
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Adam B
The queue is now running and caught up to the top of the review queue.
Please let me know if we should adjust anything.
Thanks,
Adam
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
> One of the bots that Eric and I have been working on is about to come
> online. This bot is a "style bot" t
fwiw, I'm not aware of any bad error reports that people are hitting in
practice although as Adam mentioned it is possible for various reasons. If
we hit any incorrect warnings with any frequency, we should disable them or
fix them.
Of course, there are a lots of WebKit style guidelines that it do
Yeah, I think improving the script would be great. I'm not actually
an expert on how it works internally, but I think David Levin is.
It's easy for the bot to pass a flag to the script if that would be
helpful. In general, I think we should give it a try and iterate to
remove the biggest pain poi
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Chris Jerdonek
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009, Adam Barth wrote:
>>> Hopefully, the script will improve over time, but it will
>>> never be perfect.
>>
>> Can you elaborate on this? For example, are you say
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Chris Jerdonek
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009, Adam Barth wrote:
>> A1: Unfortunately, no. First of all, check-webkit-style has false
>> negatives.
>
> It seems like this answers the different question, "If the style-queue
> complains, does that mean my patch has
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009, Adam Barth wrote:
> One of the bots that Eric and I have been working on is about to come
> online. This bot is a "style bot" that runs check-webkit-style on
> patches that have been nominated for review.
This seems like a good effort, thanks. A couple minor comments belo
Maybe in the case of failure, provide a link to further information?
Kenneth
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:44 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Maciej Stachowiak
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 28, 2009, at 2:21 AM, Adam
On Nov 28, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Maciej Stachowiak
wrote:
On Nov 28, 2009, at 2:21 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
1) "Adding an extra flags is going to cause confusion." The
style-queue does not add any flags to Bugzilla. Instead of storing
it's sta
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2009, at 2:21 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
>> 1) "Adding an extra flags is going to cause confusion." The
>> style-queue does not add any flags to Bugzilla. Instead of storing
>> it's state in Bugzilla flags (like commit-queue does
Sounds like a good idea in general. Some comments below:
On Nov 28, 2009, at 2:21 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
One of the bots that Eric and I have been working on is about to come
online. This bot is a "style bot" that runs check-webkit-style on
patches that have been nominated for review. I'd lik
One of the bots that Eric and I have been working on is about to come
online. This bot is a "style bot" that runs check-webkit-style on
patches that have been nominated for review. I'd like to ask your
patience while we work out the kinks.
You can skip the rest of this email if you're not intere
19 matches
Mail list logo
