On 5/15/13 1:56 AM, Andrew Rist wrote: > > On 5/13/2013 8:42 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: >> Hi Stuart, >> >> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 01:16:55AM +0000, V Stuart Foote wrote: >>> Sorry for the cross post, but this rubs on both the QA and Dev sides >>> of the project. >>> >>> So, I understand that we are mid-way through, a full regression >>> testing of the 4.0 branch at Rev 1478648. But has the project actively >>> stopped the building of dailys, >> No, it's just that trunk was broken since Friday. >> >>> and have the cognizant developers been asked to stop posting up their >>> snapshot builds? >> No, Developer Snapshots are built weekly, last one is based on revision >> 1479864/ rev. 1479897 (this last one is the revision from the snapshot >> tag). >> >>> If so, fine but would help to know that as it does impact testing of >>> patches for those of us not rolling our own builds. >>> >>> Or is it just an unfortunate confluence of events between the build >>> bots and the hand posted work for our outstanding AOO developers? >>> >>> In any case the BuildBot site is a mess > true - true > I've been focused on other things and have not had time to watch over > this. What is still alive is now back on track. >>> ( http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ ) with even the Linux >>> 64-bit now failing. And since the Development Snapshot Builds - full >>> installation sets >>> ( >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshotfullsets) >>> >>> are not labeled with the SVN revision >> This is a bug (at least on the Linux builds), thanks for reporting it >> (CentOS subversion is 1.6 and I checked the snapshot with 1.7 on other >> system, so svn info fails). > Linux64 had a bug that got fixed, and it is now building. > The Windows bots all had hung processes (building apr) with I've cleaned > up. and are building now. > Linux32 bots are waiting on infra to recreate the linux32 - we've asked > them to create a CentOS 5 32bit bot (say that 5 times fast) Once we have > that, we should be able to produce the correct set of bits for linux > platform. > As this is non-standard, it is waiting in the infra JIRA queue. > We are also waiting on Mac and FBSD bots. (before the cry is raised to > loud, let's please remember that we have the ability to suck up rather > large amounts of bandwidth and disk space, so we have to be mindful of > not overwhelming the resources that exist - that said, it would be nice > to get these resources for the project)
it would not be only nice it is a must to run this project successful. We need a working and reliable build bot infra structure. If we have a problem here we have to address it and if we can't solve it inside the ASF, we can try to find other sponsors who are interested to help with that. > > >> >>> it is frustrating to download >>> and end-up not having a current build to test latest patches. >> IMHO it is better to use the Developer Snapshots, and if a developer >> tells you that s/he has fixed the bug in trunk, wait for the next >> developer snapshot to confirm. Of course, you are free to download >> a nightly build, but as you've seen they are not always available. > I think it would be best if we had buildbot builds that we trust. We > have snapshot builds now, and if they do not build the right thing, we > should fix them, not discount them. exactly we want build bots that produce reliable output comparable to the release builds. That means also that we need build bots that fulfill our requirements and more important our baseline that is probably not ASF standard. Juergen > > A. > > >> >> >> Regards > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
