Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> (1) If a tinderbox build is "red" it must be possible to find out the >> reason within minutes, possibly with one or two mouse clicks. > > It is three clicks. > EIS -> see the red status -> click on the tinderbox link (1) > on thinderbox page -> click on "l L C" to open the popup (2) > Within the popup -> click on "Summary log" (or full log) (3)
I got reports from developers that it didn't work reliably in the past. If that had changed meanwhile an important blocker would have been removed (IMHO). Fine. >> (2) If the reason for the "red" state is that the build broke because of >> a machine or infrastructure problem it should be ignored. > > Yes. Or more precicely: if the error log does not clearly show that the error is caused by a compilation problem it should be ignored. It's up to the build process to provide useful error messages. >> (4) The developer that fixed the error must be able to restart the >> tinderbox build immediately to get a result in an acceptable time frame. > > Nope, I disagree. This is not a must. OK, let's say: in a reasonable time frame. "Immediately" is too much, I agree. > Would you agree on rejecting CWS that break the build on one of the > tracked platforms? Of course not. But in this case it's easy and fast to fix the problem, rebuild and continue. In most cases (e.g. simple build breaker due to a compiler error) this takes only a few hours, depending on the number of platforms to rebuild. For me anything that takes more than a few hours to verify the fix for the broken build is inacceptable. But that's only my opinion. Other people may have others. But at the end that doesn't matter. My main objection against taking action regarding Tinderbox builds immediately(!) is another one. As I said, there has been a team set up to install the process. This was decided by the Release Status Meeting and we should do what is decided there. So I think we shouldn't rush things and we shouldn't take an immediate action like it was suggested by Thorsten. Let's wait for the results. And whatever is decided, let's give it a test for a few weeks until we make it mandatory for all developers. It is totally inacceptable that new processes are created and people must follow it without being asked before and without reacting on their objections. BTW: we didn't have Tinderbox builds for years. We should be able to wait some more weeks until a process has been established that is supported by all involved parties. Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
