On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 04:05 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > sön 2009-08-16 klockan 10:23 +1000 skrev Robert Collins: > > > If the noise is too disturbing to folk we can investigate these... I > > wouldn't want anyone to leave the list because of these reports. > > I would expect the number of reports to decline significantly as we > learn to check commits better to avoid getting flamed in failed build > reports an hour later.. combined with the filtering just applied which > already reduced it to 1/6. > > But seriously, it would be a sad day if these reports becomes so > frequent compared to other discussions that developers no longer would > like to stay subscribed. We then have far more serious problems..
Discussion on this list can be quite sporadic, and its easy for build message volume to be a significant overhead - at least thats my experience in other projects - lists which have unintentional traffic feel hard to deal with. This includes bug mail, build mail, automated status reports and so on. Secondly, I wager that many folk on this list are not regular committers and are unlikely to hop up and fix a build failure; so its not really the right balance for them to be hearing about failures. I think it makes sense to have a dedicated list (squild-bui...@squid-cache.org) for build status activity. I probably won't be on it, for instance. (I prefer to track such data via rss feeds - they don't grab my attention when I'm in the middle of something else, but the data is there and I can still look at and fix things). -Rob
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part