|
||||||||
|
This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira |
||||||||
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Issues" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
I am all for both methods, in fact the best setup would be to use both as you suggested.
If you can build very quickly and there is a lot of changes , then yes the sequential builds is needed. and that is why i voted for it.
But if the build takes an hour then sequential builds can take too long.
That is why i use to do an overnight test (say midnight) to build with a lot of changes and then do the binary chopping.
So by 1am the system knows that somewhere in forexample 20 changes there is an error.
It would take using binary chop (20/10/5/2) 4 hours for the system to nail the culprit!
So by 6 am the morning everyone knows who broke the longs builds.