Excessive inbound bustage
Do I have terrible timing when it comes to landing patches, or has inbound been closed due to bustage far too often over the past couple of months? At first I thought maybe it was the former, but now I'm believing that it is the latter. As of late, when I check to see if inbound is open, I just assume it is going to be closed before I even check its status. I can only infer that patches are not being tested extensively enough on try. To me this is symptomatic of a problem: What is it about try that we are avoiding it, and what can we do to improve the situation? ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Excessive inbound bustage
I think perhaps part of the question is what the purpose of m-i versus try is. My general algorithm is that you should get your patch to the point where you have tested it locally and have reasonable confidence that there are no portability issues and then it's fine to land it on m-i without try. And if you think there are likely to be portability issues or you don't want to/can't run tests locally you should push to try. In answer to the question of why I avoid try, the answer is simple: it's slow. With that said, I think the right fix isn't to make try faster (though that would also be good) but to make autolanding work. That way people could just fire and forget without inconveniencing others if their patch failed. -Ekr On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Aaron Klotz wrote: > Do I have terrible timing when it comes to landing patches, or has inbound > been closed due to bustage far too often over the past couple of months? At > first I thought maybe it was the former, but now I'm believing that it is > the latter. > > As of late, when I check to see if inbound is open, I just assume it is > going to be closed before I even check its status. > > I can only infer that patches are not being tested extensively enough on > try. To me this is symptomatic of a problem: What is it about try that we > are avoiding it, and what can we do to improve the situation? > ___ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Excessive inbound bustage
Some exciting statistics on these things if you're interested: http://futurama.theautomatedtester.co.uk/ I'll leave it to you to draw whatever conclusions you want. -Ryan On 4/20/2015 4:54 PM, Aaron Klotz wrote: Do I have terrible timing when it comes to landing patches, or has inbound been closed due to bustage far too often over the past couple of months? At first I thought maybe it was the former, but now I'm believing that it is the latter. As of late, when I check to see if inbound is open, I just assume it is going to be closed before I even check its status. I can only infer that patches are not being tested extensively enough on try. To me this is symptomatic of a problem: What is it about try that we are avoiding it, and what can we do to improve the situation? ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Excessive inbound bustage
"then it's fine to land it on m-i without try." Maybe because I usually work on core, and such confidence is hard to reach there, but I'd like to think at least a try run that check if the patch builds on all platform and a full test run on at least one platform is not too much sacrifice of ones time. Personally I think that "my time" is cheaper than "everyone's time". It is slow. It is annoying, but holding up ALL the other patches/developers is expensive hence a risky option. So I suggest everyone to be very conservative about that confident feeling. I'm all for auto landing, but with all the intermittent bugs we have it's not easy I guess. On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > I think perhaps part of the question is what the purpose of m-i versus try > is. > > My general algorithm is that you should get your patch to the point > where you have tested it locally and have reasonable confidence that there > are no portability issues and then it's fine to land it on m-i without try. > And if you think there are likely to be portability issues or you don't > want to/can't run tests locally you should push to try. > > In answer to the question of why I avoid try, the answer is simple: it's > slow. > > With that said, I think the right fix isn't to make try faster (though that > would > also be good) but to make autolanding work. That way people could just > fire and forget without inconveniencing others if their patch failed. > > -Ekr > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Aaron Klotz wrote: > > > Do I have terrible timing when it comes to landing patches, or has > inbound > > been closed due to bustage far too often over the past couple of months? > At > > first I thought maybe it was the former, but now I'm believing that it is > > the latter. > > > > As of late, when I check to see if inbound is open, I just assume it is > > going to be closed before I even check its status. > > > > I can only infer that patches are not being tested extensively enough on > > try. To me this is symptomatic of a problem: What is it about try that we > > are avoiding it, and what can we do to improve the situation? > > ___ > > dev-platform mailing list > > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > > > ___ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
