Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
The current process is a simple nighly build [that] is good
for the nighlies, but I think I don't have to explain the
difference between a real CI environment and a nighly build script.
That is correct. We have a CI at the ASF. The nightly wasn't intended to
replace it. However ...
Cool! I'm very happy with Hudson :-) We have an issue because it rarely
stuck during an Hadoop+jSPF build (weird) and I'm working with the zone
mantainers to fix this.
The specific issue I was recording in this message was the inability to
know what exact test failed (we have only summaries for each test class).
The entire build log is posted to the build site. It seems to me that if
you want more detail, just enhance the build. The nightly process is just a
shell script that runs the build, generates the e-mail summary, and uploads
the build artifacts with full log.
Is there something you want that can't be done via the above?
I know. But the exact test was not in the log. The ant build does not
give that output. I see it instead in the maven build.
I don't want to deal with improving the ant build now, but I set up both
ant and maven builds on hudson and I've been able to debug the issue.
Also I found it unvaluable to be able to run a "kill -3 <buildpid>" on
the hudson zone to get the stackdump in recent debug for JSPF-65.
I think we have all I need now, thank you for your collaboration!
Ubuntu 7.10.
JVM used? (IIRC it didn't find the Java 1.4 issues, so I thought it was
1.5, but if you tell us the specific version it will be helpful)
JVM parameters used by ant.
I don't recall if it is Java 5 or 6, and freakishly, I don't have access to
it right now. I need to fix the SSH connection back through my firewall
when I get home. Right now it is on autopilot.
On hudson we now hava a java 1.4 ant build and a java 5 maven build: a
little diversification should help. If you are on java 6 this would
complete the range.
We've talked about having a JAMES zone for testing. Of course, you were
against it the last time, apparently for the sole reason that I
suggested
it.
I've never been against this. You may have misunderstood me.
LOL Actually, you're right -- I went back and cbecked. It is always you who
disagrees, but in this case it was BERND! LOL OK, I apologize. :-)
--- Noel
;-) It seems we have an agreement then...
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
