Forwarding this on to the wider CI team - [email protected]
On a first look, most of these appear to be doable via job configuration changes. And as you pointed out a couple of the jobs are mislabled or misconfigured (kdub identified that the current phone test is building vivid packages, but installing on a wily image, this needs to be fixed). I expect we can get this problems addressed first and start moving on to these other updates. Francis On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Kevin Gunn <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Francis - > I wanted to start a conversation with you as I think you might already be > chasing some of this and you're probably the right person. > So it dawned on me through the ci hiccups from gcc5 transition, that what > we would want in an ideal world is projects tested on all supported > platforms/archives with some relative priority attached. > Meaning for example.... > #1 priorities - really should never be broken > vivid+overlay armhf (any real phone hw) > wily armhf (any real phone hw) > wily i386 > wily amd64 > > #2 priorities - should warn if broken > wily arm64 > vivid on amd64 > vivid on i386 > > #3 proiorities - nice to have > vivid on armhf (not necessarily phone hw) > > I think at the moment there are projects like unity8 & mir that are only > using wily - so no vivid+overlay coverage. Which is really not good for our > desire and push for quality on phone programs. When we were dual landing > and wily & vivid+o were very close then no problem....but the toolchain > alone now is good reason to address this. NOTE: also mir jobs are still > labled "vivid" even thot they're using wily (which i'm guessing you've > probably noticed) > > At any rate I'm raising this because I think not only my team's projects > but the wider org should all be following the outline above. e.g. teams > belonging to bfiller, dbarth, bzoltan, etc > > Let me know what you think. > Also, let me know if we can mix archive targets within a project ci ? I > would suppose it would be up to the job definition - so i would think we > can do this. > > And I hate to be this way, but that lack of coverage for vivid+o is to me > so concerning I feel like we need to address this asap (even tho self > service ci may be coming, i think not quick enough to make sure we close > this gap) > Also, I am happy for my teams to help with proj ci job management if > needed...i would think other teams would be as well. > > br,kg > -- Francis Ginther Canonical - Ubuntu Engineering - Continuous Integration Team
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~canonical-ci-engineering Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~canonical-ci-engineering More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
