Am 09.11.2011 um 17:21 schrieb Adam Barth: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Patrick Gansterer <par...@paroga.com> wrote: >> Some of my thought on this, since I have the same "problems" with my WinCE >> bot: >> >> 1) Is there any real benefit in the CoreBuilders concept (since it's not >> used as intended as Eric already wrote)? > > If it were up to me, I'd remove the concept because causes me more > headaches than it's worth. However, ggaren makes some good points > about why it's useful. Hopefully having that wiki page will help.
Sorry, but I don't see the benefit compared to the "is 90% green" solution. >> 2) When we still want the CoreBuilder concept: Can we make the core/non-core >> transition without any SVN change? What about improving the buildbot-master, >> so that it dertiminates the core/non-core on the fly, by checking the last x >> builds? I don't like the idea of adding and removing the the bots to the >> "core list" all the time. > > I'd be happy to review such a change. Practically, however, if > there's a configuration that a large number of developers use (e.g., > apple-mac), it's probably worth having on the front page even if it's > red a lot. An alternative might be to split the bots into categories like "apple", "chrome", "qt" and so on instead of "core"/"non-core". But this won't help in catching problems on the "other" bots. So not sure if that is a practicable solution. >> 3) It's hard for non full time contributes to get informed about broken >> bots, if you don't watch the buildbot site the whole day. >> a) Maybe we can tell the buildbot to write a mail to the build slave >> maintainer, when the bot is broken. (It happened more than once that my bot >> was red for days, because I didn't get informed about it). >> b) I agree that keeping all bots green is not the task of the committer, >> but maybe someone should trigger the port maintainer to fix it. I have no >> idea about a general working rule, but as of my experience the committer >> simply "don't see" the problem. E.g. WinCE bot builds the interpreter >> version of JSC, which is a "core feature" and not port specific, but the >> commit author didn't see the break. > > It's petty easy to write a webkit-patch command that monitors the bots > and files bugs when they fail or whatever. If I were you, I'd just > write such a monitoring command rather than wait for other folks to > solve this problem for me. I don't want other folks to do "my work", I'm not happy, but ok with the current state. I wanted to add my view to this topic. :-) Maybe other folks have similar requirements, so that we find a more general solution, instead of many home brew ones. - Patrick _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
