On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com> wrote: > That shouldn't be too much of a burden, or is it? It doesn't tie up > executors like some of the other failing builds.
It does tie up an SCMTrigger which is a resource that keeps failing and does require administration (they will get stuck when slaves fail and requires killing or they will keep a thread stuck forever). That said, it is certainly not as resource intensive as running the full build. > Instead of the time limit, would it make more sense to only disable > those jobs where >n of the last builds have failed? Reasonable idea, let me play around with a script for that purpose and get back with a new list to compare. /niklas
