We're ready to turn down the cr-linux EWS bots at your command. Just let us know (via email or #webkit). Thanks!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Geoffrey Garen <gga...@apple.com> wrote: > To clarify: > > (1) The EWS bots are still running. > > (2) The mac and mac-wk2 EWS bots are running tests, and passing. > > (3) The cr-linux bots are running tests, and failing. > > If we're OK with item (3), we can go ahead with cleaning house, and break > the cr-* EWS bots entirely, while we work on making the mac and mac-wk2 EWS > bots faster. > > Geoff > > On Apr 4, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpi...@apple.com> wrote: > > I think everyone is agreeing that we should have a suitable replacement for > EWS. > > But I also want to see us move forward with clean ups. I think such clean > ups will bring clarity to what we would want our EWS testing to look like > since we'll have fewer configurations to test. > > I like the approach of switching to manual testing in the short term, and > working in parallel on an EWS replacement. > > Sent from my PDP-11 > > On Apr 4, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Brent Fulgham <bfulg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I definitely do not want to see the EWS system go away. But in the short > term , I would be in favor of manual commits and manual testing. > > We still have the build bots running tests, so it's not like we lose all > coverage. > > Thanks, > > -Brent > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 4, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Geoffrey Garen <gga...@apple.com> wrote: > >> I'd also suggest purging the chromium layout tests ASAP so we can enjoy >> the much-reduced archive sync costs. > > > We really need to get the Mac or Win EWS performing tests by default and > reliably before doing this. At present, only the chromium-linux EWS bot has > been consistently running tests. When Mac/Win tests were turned on recently, > it resulted in huge backups on those EWS bots, and eventually having tests > disabled. > > > Sorry, I got excited and removed the Chromium test results before I read > this email. > > If committers are willing to do their own regression testing and committing, > we can move forward with cleaning house. (For what it's worth, that's how > I've always worked.) > > Otherwise, if we want to depend on the Chromium EWS tester and the Chromium > commit queue, we have to put cleaning house on hold. We need to keep the > Chromium/v8 port building, and maintain its test results, until we have > alternate sources for that stuff. If that's the consensus, I'll restore the > cr-linux and cr-linux-x86 test results. > > My preference is to move forward with cleaning house. It has already reduced > the webkit download size by 1GB. What do other folks think? > > Regards, > Geoff > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev