On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 02:09:20PM -0700, Ben Reser wrote: > On 8/30/13 4:01 AM, Bert Huijben wrote: > >On 8/30/13 1:37 AM, Julian Foad wrote: > > So we only see problems a day later? > > And can check our fixes the day after. > > > > Maybe we should then also ask every committer to test on Windows and Unix > > before every commit? > > (Or maybe ask them to setup their own bots, because we can't provide them > > the current test coverage) > > > > Why reduce the testing on the existing buildbots? > > You realize I'm talking about the release branch build bots. I don't think > any > particular change is needed for trunk build bots. >
Usually the stable branches get code changes only when svn-role commits them, which is in batch from 4am to 4:01am, so the question isn't as much "daily or post-commit" as it is "Test tonight's batch in aggregate (aka just test the new HEAD), or test each of tonight's commits separately". Daniel > As it is right now the branch build bots are generally broken anyway because > they live on the same host machines as trunk and trunk marches on and requires > dependencies that the release branches can't use. > > So even a more basic set of tests on every commit would be an improvement. I > also don't think we need as much effort on every commit in the release > branches > because they are review then commit and tend to move much more slowly. > > > We should just add 'fast bots' if we think the current bots are too slow. I > > don't think new hardware was added at the primary bots for the last 2-3 > > years, so just spending some money there should improve the build times > > without reducing the test coverage given within a few hours. > > Sure if we can find resources to do more testing fast I'm not objecting to > that. I'm just trying to prioritize resources where they are needed most. > > I didn't really mention it but it's critical that the release branches have > build bots that are stable. They can't be shared with trunk if we're going to > use OS packages (and we probably should).
