On Mon November 16 2009 11:23:42 am Nigel Daley wrote:
> I think anything currently *unbound* gets run on the master since it's
> the only 'slave' that isn't reserved for tied jobs (last I looked).
So would it make sense to "untick" that tick box for vesta and/or minerva?
--
Daniel Kulp
dk...@a
On Nov 16, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Tim Ellison wrote:
On 16/Nov/2009 09:53, Jukka Zitting wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 00:01, Nigel Daley
wrote:
How do we determine this for the 100+ jobs?
I'm assuming we can ask -- all Hudson users are sup
On 16/Nov/2009 09:53, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 00:01, Nigel Daley wrote:
>>> How do we determine this for the 100+ jobs?
>> I'm assuming we can ask -- all Hudson users are supposed to be subbed
>> to infrastructure@ at
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 00:01, Nigel Daley wrote:
>> How do we determine this for the 100+ jobs?
>
> I'm assuming we can ask -- all Hudson users are supposed to be subbed
> to infrastructure@ at least. Also we can change the main site
>
On 16/Nov/2009 00:12, Justin Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 00:01, Nigel Daley wrote:
>> On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:59 AM, "Tim Ellison" wrote:
>>> On 14/Nov/2009 04:46, Nigel Daley wrote:
>> I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the
>> "Ubuntu" label (which al
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 00:01, Nigel Daley wrote:
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:59 AM, "Tim Ellison" wrote:
>
>> On 14/Nov/2009 04:46, Nigel Daley wrote:
>
> I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the
> "Ubuntu" label (which already exists),
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:59 AM, "Tim Ellison"
wrote:
On 14/Nov/2009 04:46, Nigel Daley wrote:
I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the
"Ubuntu" label (which already exists), so both minerva and vesta
get
used.
We should also encourage project
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 20:28, Tim Ellison wrote:
> On 14/Nov/2009 04:46, Nigel Daley wrote:
I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the
"Ubuntu" label (which already exists), so both minerva and vesta get
used.
We should also encourage projects (spa
On 14/Nov/2009 04:46, Nigel Daley wrote:
>>> I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the
>>> "Ubuntu" label (which already exists), so both minerva and vesta get
>>> used.
>>>
>>> We should also encourage projects (spam-assasin, ftpserver, struts,
>>> vysper, xwork2) to move
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 04:47, Nigel Daley wrote:
>
> On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Nigel Daley wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:10 PM, Tim Ellison wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/Nov/2009 12:48, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Nigel Daley wrote:
>
> We should als
On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Nigel Daley wrote:
On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:10 PM, Tim Ellison wrote:
On 05/Nov/2009 12:48, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Nigel Daley
wrote:
We should also encourage projects (spam-assasin, ftpserver,
struts, vysper,
xwork2) to move o
I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the
"Ubuntu" label (which already exists), so both minerva and vesta
get used.
We should also encourage projects (spam-assasin, ftpserver, struts,
vysper, xwork2) to move off of the Master hudson.zones.apache.org
Why are minerv
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Nigel Daley wrote:
> I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the "Ubuntu"
> label (which already exists), so both minerva and vesta get used.
Done for FtpServer and Vysper. Also moved our builds tied to "master"
to the "Solaris 10" group so
On 04/Nov/2009 23:18, Nigel Daley wrote:
> Tim, the Hadoop labeled machines were not donated to ASF. Minerva,
> Vesta, and a couple others (used now for buildbot) were donated to ASF.
Ok, that is fair enough.
> I agree we should encourage folks to tie their linux builds to the
> "Ubuntu" label (
On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:10 PM, Tim Ellison wrote:
On 05/Nov/2009 12:48, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Nigel Daley
wrote:
We should also encourage projects (spam-assasin, ftpserver,
struts, vysper,
xwork2) to move off of the Master hudson.zones.apache.org
As for
On 05/Nov/2009 12:48, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Nigel Daley wrote:
>> We should also encourage projects (spam-assasin, ftpserver, struts, vysper,
>> xwork2) to move off of the Master hudson.zones.apache.org
>
> As for FtpServer, we want our builds on Solaris (in
their jobs on both Linux and Solaris, though, to do that
Maybe we can just define a useful set of labels to sets of nodes and
encourage people to tie builds to them rather than specific machines.
Regards,
Tim
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 14:48, Tim Ellison
wrote:
Just looking at the Huds
ilds to them rather than specific machines.
Regards,
Tim
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 14:48, Tim Ellison wrote:
>> Just looking at the Hudson machine utilization at the moment. There are
>> a number of jobs that are tied to particular machines in the queue, and
>> a number of (h
on a program of persuading projects to
schedule their jobs on both Linux and Solaris, though, to do that
--j.
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 14:48, Tim Ellison wrote:
> Just looking at the Hudson machine utilization at the moment. There are
> a number of jobs that are tied to particular ma
Just looking at the Hudson machine utilization at the moment. There are
a number of jobs that are tied to particular machines in the queue, and
a number of (hadoop-labeled) machines that are committed to tied jobs only.
I realize that the machines are courteously donated etc, but is the
capacity
20 matches
Mail list logo
