Ok, looks like we are converging on this across a few hundred emails ;) So, as has been stated elsewhere: test-patch will be improved to fully support Windows; furthermore -1 from Windows' test-patch won't block Linux commits. This is ok with me.
Can we have a JIRA ticket for that test-patch work assigned to the real owner, so it can be tracked? I am +1 in this case. Cos On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 04:57PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko > <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Commitment is a good thing. > > I think the two builds that I proposed are a prerequisite for Win support. > > If we commit windows patch people will start breaking it the next day. > > Which we wont know without the nightly build and wont be able to fix > > without the on-demand one. > > As several people have pointed out already, the surface of possible > conflicts is relatively limited, and- as you did in 2007- the devs on > Windows will report and fix bugs in that platform as they find them. > CI is important for detecting and preventing bugs, but this isn't > software we're launching into orbit. > > > Making two builds is less than 2 days work, imho, given that there is > > a Windows node available and that mvn targets are in place. Correct me > > if I missed any complications in the process. > > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > It seems that with the HW in place, the matter of setting at least nightly > > build is trivial for anyone with up to date Windows knowledge. I wish I > > could > > help. Going without a validation is a recipe for a disaster IMO. > > Fair enough, though that also implies that the window for regressions > is small, and it leaves little room to doubt that this will receive > priority. Until it's merged, spurious notifications that the current > trunk breaks Windows are an awkward introduction to devs' workflow. > The order of merge/CI is a choice between mild annoyances, really. > > But it might be moot. Giri: you're doing the work on this. When do you > think it can be complete? -C
