> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nigel Daley [mailto:nda...@yahoo-inc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 23 April 2009 3:23 PM
> To: Gavin
> Cc: builds@apache.org; infrastruct...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Welcome to the builds list!
> 
> 
> On Apr 16, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Gavin wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: bdelacre...@gmail.com [mailto:bdelacre...@gmail.com] On
> >> Behalf Of
> >> Bertrand Delacretaz
> >> Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2009 6:28 PM
> >> To: builds@apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Welcome to the builds list!
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Gavin <ga...@16degrees.com.au>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Nigel Daley [mailto:nda...@yahoo-inc.com]
> >>>> .... Also, Gavin can we have ci.apache.org go to a page that
> >>>> points to
> >> the
> >>>> 3 CI choices that Apache projects have: Buildbot, Continuum, and
> >> Hudson?
> >>>
> >>> Absolutely, ci.apache.org was created a couple of months back whilst
> >> testing
> >>> buildbot and before this amalgamation of CIs list was thought
> >>> about. It
> >>> makes sense so I will do that soon, thanks for the suggestion....
> >>
> >> It might be good to mention this list there as well.
> >> -Bertrand
> >
> > Yep good plan.
> >
> > A slight change to name to use as the main builds area to go to,
> > ci.apache.org has been advertised/blogged/tweeted/whatever as
> > belonging to
> > the buildbot setup. I think it is too late now to move that to another
> > domain. Either way, a new name was needed for either buildbot usage
> > or the
> > main builds area (landing page?).
> >
> > So, to keep inline with this list name etc, and Wendy proposed on
> > IRC that
> > builds.apache.org would be a better fit for the new area.
> >
> > If there are no objections I'd like to ask infra if they could set
> > that up
> > for us? (cc:d)
> >
> > Gav...
> 
> Hmm, not crazy about this, but ok. 

You're a little behind, please see the mail entitled 'New landing page' - we
didn't go with builds.apache.org either.

> Not sure why you didn't go with
> buildbot.apache.org.  Taking ci.apache.org seems a little over reaching.

What planet are you on? This isn't a competition. Everything I do around
here you question with disdain, you continually angle at getting me to
advertise Hudson wherever possible.

ci.apache.org was chosen as buildbot.apache.org was rejected by other infra
members as being to specific. ci.apache.org was someone else's idea. So it
was enabled and I happily started setting up buildbot to use it.

Then I though it would be a good idea to create a mailing list where folks
could talk about buildbot and its services etc basically so I didn't have to
join 200+ dev lists. Someone then said why not make it a list for all build
services, so we did that.

You then wanted a landing page area that people could go to to 'choose'
between which build service they want, and you wanted to use ci.apache.org
for it that buildbot was already using and was advertised as such, I offered
builds.apache.org as an alternative, others in infra thought that creating
new subdomain for one page was too much (you could call it 'a little over
reaching') so I created a page called http://apache.org/dev/builds.html
(after ci.html was also rejected) - and I asked you to edit your section to
suit which you have yet to do.

Note that I am here for Buildbot, but I have bent over backwards to
accommodate your moaning about Hudson. You haven't asked Continuum or Gump
to advertise 'your' Hudson on their pages so why are you picking on me. I've
helped everyone by creating a landing page, by getting this mail list set
up, with the aim that every project can make use of for whichever build
service they want to use, and you're still not happy. Where are your
commits, what have you done?

No doubt I'll regret hitting send here but heck, doing all this volunteer
work only to get shot at every turn is getting to me.

Gav...

> 
> Nige
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.12.2/2074 - Release Date: 4/22/2009
> 8:49 AM

Reply via email to