RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] There will be no more Ganymatic buildssch

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> Actually, I think the tagging
trick won't help here since it's not 
> necessarily the contents
of the .sc file that's problematic but the
> contents of the referenced
update site.
 
Ah, I see now what you mean. Yes, I doubt this can be
handled 
automatically by build scripts but it is the exact reason
I personally 
was motivated to make the builds responsive to check-ins.
Perhaps 
simply due to my working hours, I twice ran into this
problem where 
I was re-building the new site when the Ganymatic ran
so I would 
immediately fix the problem, but then have to wait 24
hours
to see the results. 

And, as you imply, it would help to have a better process
on my end 
to do the working update site in a more evolutionary way
... but, now 
that we can re-build at will ... that process improvement
is a tiny bit 
less urgent :)

From:	"Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:	"Cross project issues" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	02/22/2008 05:28 AM
Subject:	RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] There will be no more        Ganymatic        buildsscheduled

---

Thanks Dave.
 
Actually, I think the tagging
trick won't help here since it's not 
necessarily the contents of the
.sc file that's problematic but the
contents of the referenced update
site.
 
I know that when adding something
to an update site, this should
be done in a "backward compatible
manner" such that the previous
contents is still accessible;
but, as a matter of fact, doing so is
not always easy. Therefore, often
an entire update site including
its site.xml file is exchanged,
thus being incompatible with the
.sc file in place (for a short
time).
 
Perhaps what we really need is
instructions or tools to add stuff
to an update site without destroying
its current contents. That
might really fix the issue since
then, the old .sc file would still
work and the new .sc file can
be added at any time.
 
Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior
Member of Technical Staff, Wind
River
Target Management Project Lead,
DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm

---

From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of David M Williams
Sent: Freitag, 22. Februar 2008 10:48
To: Cross project issues
Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] There will be no more Ganymatic
buildsscheduled


Improvements can probably be made, but let's see how it goes before we
do too much more work. 
For the most part, I think a failure due to multiple activity would be
rare, but I have seen one unexplainable 
failure. 

If, after another milestone or so, we fine that almost always (e.g 80%)
of the time, a failure is "fixed" by just 
running it again, then yes, we should do something to improve that. In
WTP we do it by tagging what's in 
head, and then retrieving the content with that tag ... that greatly narrows
the range of possible conflict, since 
that tagging operation is fairly quick and sort-of atomic. (not literally,
but, close, I think, and similar in effect). 

And yes, an sc file changed in the middle of a build would cause another
build to be kicked off during 
the following cycle. 

Patches welcome :) _______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev