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
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 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
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 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
