notice that all the master branch runs in your travis job fail due to timeout as well.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> wrote: > Hi Daan, > > The cool thing about Travis is that you can create your own Travis job > with your Github ACS repo (from which you created/sent the PR) and > control its jobs. For example, I created one for our team here: > https://travis-ci.org/shapeblue/cloudstack/builds > > > On Wednesday 04 February 2015 05:51 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: >> >> I noticed that travis doesn't complete anymore as the five jobs take >> to long to complete. effectively we have nothing at the moment that >> automatically checks. >> >> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >>> >>> Rajani: >>> >>> I signed up to get an initial pass done, but haven't yet had the >>> cycles. It's top of my list for next week. >>> >>> We wanted to get something up and try it to have something demonstrable. >>> >>> --David >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Rajani Karuturi <raj...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I like github+jenkins approach. In the current Travis setup, the wait >>>> time >>>> for getting it to run is high(especially if there are more commits >>>> around >>>> the time) and often timesout. >>>> >>>> I think we should have separate jenkins jobs for commits and pull >>>> requests. >>>> For the commits, instead of it running for every commit, may be it could >>>> run periodically for all the changes during the time. >>>> >>>> Is anyone working on the jenkins plugin already or do we have any >>>> volunteers? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ~Rajani >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Stephen Turner >>>> <stephen.tur...@citrix.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Agreed, I was hoping for some comments. Maybe an executive summary >>>>> would >>>>> help: >>>>> >>>>> * We would like to have a commit/review mechanism that is much easier >>>>> for >>>>> new contributors than the current one >>>>> * Committers cannot be forced to use it, but the benefits should be so >>>>> obvious that it's the norm (except for emergencies or security patches) >>>>> * We propose GitHub as the most familiar and easy to use system >>>>> * All pull requests should trigger Jenkins to run automated tests, and >>>>> we >>>>> shouldn't accept the pull request until they've passed >>>>> >>>>> What have I forgotten? And does anyone think we're not on the right >>>>> track? >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Stephen Turner >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] >>>>> Sent: 29 January 2015 12:25 >>>>> To: dev >>>>> Subject: Re: quality improvement project status (fyi != just for your >>>>> information) >>>>> >>>>> no worries, everybody is busy with glibc anyway these days. I didn't >>>>> have >>>>> any feedback to our pages, however, That worries me more. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Stephen Turner >>>>> <stephen.tur...@citrix.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I was ill yesterday. But I wasn't sure what more we had to >>>>> >>>>> discuss before the hardware arrives. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Stephen Turner >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] >>>>>> Sent: 28 January 2015 12:39 >>>>>> To: dev >>>>>> Subject: Re: quality improvement project status (fyi != just for your >>>>>> information) >>>>>> >>>>>> I did not see any reactions, are we on for tonight? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Daan Hoogland >>>>>> <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> H, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a question for feedback (fyi == For Your Input;). In the >>>>>>> meetings we had so far, we created a couple of lists. These are our >>>>>>> only deliverables to date. In order to know if we are on the right >>>>>>> track I would like some feedback. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> First of all there is the highlevel requirement [1]. It should >>>>>>> contain everything we want to accomplish in the end. We will revisit >>>>>>> it next Wednesday and in regular iterations while the project goes >>>>>>> on. I hope everybody that won't attend next session will have their >>>>>>> comments sent to us by then. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then there are two detail pages that we have come up with so far and >>>>>>> these are not done until there is some form of consensus on them in >>>>>>> the community. Especially [2] is a page that we should all agree on >>>>>>> in the end. Right now it is just a working document that we will use >>>>>>> to implement our own way of working and later propose everybody will. >>>>>>> It describes what we think are the basics of cloudstack as opposed to >>>>>>> the extras that people should support on their own and will be >>>>>>> abandoned if nobody does. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The third page [3] contains a set of requirements that we think will >>>>>>> make a gate for contributions that is workable for the community. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> please have a look and give us your feedback. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Quality+and+Pr >>>>>>> o >>>>>>> cess+Improvement+Initiative [2] >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+bas >>>>>>> i >>>>>>> c+functionalities [3] >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Gate+requireme >>>>>>> n >>>>>>> ts >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (fyi: we are looking to implement a simple contribution workflow >>>>>>> based on github in combination with jenkins pull request builder for >>>>>>> now and are still considering what would have to be done to implement >>>>>>> something like gerrit.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Daan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Daan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Daan >>>>> >> >> >> > > -- > Regards, > Rohit Yadav > Software Architect, ShapeBlue > M. +91 8826230892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com > Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab > PS. If you see any footer below, I did not add it :) > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services > > IaaS Cloud Design & > Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//> > CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/> > CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/> > CloudStack Software > Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/> > CloudStack Infrastructure > Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/> > CloudStack Bootcamp Training > Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/> > > This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or > opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the > intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based > upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender > if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a > company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a > company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue > Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil > and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a > company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under > license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark. -- Daan
