We do need to get back in the rhythm of a weekly declared I-build, and
only haven't because we've had
trouble building, testing, compiling with right compiler, etc. [and
little stated need]
Only thing (I know of) not documented here, was many of the "failures"
earlier this week were
due to a problem with a UI Unit waiting until time-out.
(see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=107697)
So ... let's formalize tthis as teams should have their
code-for-the-week released
for an declared I-build by Thursday noon. Any fixes released between
Thursday noon and Friday noon (eastern times) should only be to fix
bad problems
and will still automatically start a re-build. Teams should
do some bit of "quick tests" on the Thursday afternoon build to make
sure its
suitable as a development target. If no complaints or "requests for
re-build"
received by Friday noon that build will be declared.
We can expand or better formalize this process if/when the need arises.
The other thing we'll be doing (soon I hope) is have another directory
(and download page)
for our "warmup I-builds" ... once we "declare" one, we'll simply copy
it to the "weekly" directory, and
it will automatically, at that point, become "the most recent I biuld".
Sound workable? Suggestions welcome.
*"Ted Bashor" <tbashor@xxxxxxx>*
Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
08/24/2005 08:23 PM
Please respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."
To
<naci.dai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "General discussion of project-wide or
architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
RE: [wtp-dev] What happened to our I-builds?
Was wondering if there will be a "blessed" I-build published this week?
If we have suspended weekly blessing of I-builds, could component
leads send a note to the list if/when something changes that breaks or
significantly alters any basic scenarios not covered by the JUnit tests?
I don't particularly mind just picking the last continuous I-build
that had zero build and junit errors and trying to integrate to it,
but it would be much appreciated if major api or UI changes are
publicized (as some folks have been doing).
Thanks, Ted
-----Original Message-----
From: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Naci Dai
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 9:48 PM
To: General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues.
Subject: Re: [wtp-dev] What happened to our I-builds?
David M Williams wrote:
> Don't worry ... nothing bad has happened to them .... but I've heard
> that question a lot :)
>
They were asking you then :-) Nobody bugged me even once.
> Now we have maintenance builds going .... ability to do separate doc
> build as needed
> (much thanks to Naci, Lawrence and Jeffrey) ....
> ... everyone ready to "Integrate"? (meaning, commit HEAD, and release,
> which means tag that HEAD version
> and update map files in HEAD of releng) .... I hope I don't need to
> draw a picture :)
>
> As far as I know ... all is ready for (at least) a "Thursday I-build"
> (and I'm sure Naci will let me know if I am wrong).
I-Builds are paused but ready to go. And today is thursday so lets
start them.
> Naci ... what's your advice (or plan :) on doing maintenance and
> I-builds? Can they both be running "continuously"
> (that is, if changes detected, a build is queued up ... or should we
> have a fixed schedule for one or the other?).
>
As far as I know running two builds simultaenously has no harm other
than loading the server, but it should withstand that kind of stress. I
am all for continous builds... But this brings us to your next item,
these builds will happen as things are released so means lot of trial
buiilds. We should not confuse the user community, seperating the
download are sounds like an easy solution
> BTW, since our "frequent warm-up I-builds" seems to cause some
> confusion about "which and when to download"
> as we do them continuously ... perhaps we need a separate download
> page "for developers" ... and
> once we "declare an I-build" ... simply move it to the more general
> downloads page? (all would be public, but our
> intent might be clearer).
>
> (plus .. .we still need to get that "I-build" name changed ... to
> "tagged builds" ... I think was the most recent candidate ... I've
> lost track).
I still like the "I-Build" name, all builds are tagged, so "tagged"
does not contribute much in terms of information. Plus we use what all
other projects use. I am against changing it, especially if it does not
contribute anything.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>wtp-dev mailing list
>wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
>
>
--
Naci Dai,
eteration a.s.
Inonu cad. Sumer sok. Zitas D1-15
Kozyatagi, Istanbul 34742
+90 (533) 580 2393 (cell)
+90 (216) 361 5434 (phone)
+90 (216) 361 2034 (fax)
http://www.eteration.com/
mailto:nacidai@xxxxxxx
mailto:naci@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
