On 11/20/2015 02:58 PM, Ashod Nakashian wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 5:43 AM, David Tardon <dtar...@redhat.com <mailto:dtar...@redhat.com>> wrote:Hi, On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 05:55:01PM -0500, Ashod Nakashian wrote: > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Norbert Thiebaud <nthieb...@gmail.com <mailto:nthieb...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Stephan Bergmann <sberg...@redhat.com <mailto:sberg...@redhat.com>> > > wrote: > > > By the way, one situation where it is debatable whether all the triggered > > > builds are useful is if you push a series of changes to gerrit, and > > Jenkins > > > does builds for each of the changes in the series. For me at least, in > > such > > > a situation it would suffice if Jenkins just only did a build for the > > > topmost change. > > > > Evey commit should build.. bibisect will build each and every one of > > them eventually > > > > > But isn't that the bibisect build instance, which is unrelated to the > gerrit builds? You did not understand what Norbert was trying to say... Every commit should _be buildable_. The bibisect builder pick the commits to build at random, not only the last commit in a series (because there is no such thing as a commit series in git).
[...]
This thread is about cancelling builds on the first version of the patch, and building only the latest amended version.
Note that I had hijacked this sub-thread starting with my "By the way" message quoted above, switching topic from "kill builds of outdated revisions of a change" to "avoid builds of intermediate steps of a multi-change push."
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
