Hi, As said before: There is now a new Hudson version installed and since that event no more Clover problems. So let's give it a few days to settle and find out if maybe the problem is solved. But even if it's solved, I would not close that Hudson Bug report, we should first ask them, if somebody can explain *why* its solved.
About the whole bug: As there seem to be transfer errors when copying artifacts (like clover.xml) to the master! So I don't even trust .tar.gz files and would not recommend anybody to download and use them!!! It's better to check out and build yourself. Uwe ----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: [email protected] > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael McCandless [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 4:34 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Hudson nightly build failures due to Clover > > The false failures are from this bug in Hudson (right?): > > http://issues.hudson-ci.org/browse/HUDSON-7836 > > Somehow the clover XML is corrupted by Hudson... > > Anyway, I think we should find a workaround. In general we shouldn't let > false failures like this make us look bad. Sure we devs inside know the scoop > -- ignore the failure when it says all tests passed. > But to the outside world at first glance it makes our stability look awful. > > What workarounds can we take, short of shutting off the Clover build? > > Mike > > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 4:30 AM, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: > > We had no more nightly build failures since hudson update that were > > caused by clover. The recent ones are not caused by that, they are > > caused by a committed "nocommit" by Shaie :-) > > > > Uwe > > > > ----- > > Uwe Schindler > > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > > http://www.thetaphi.de > > eMail: [email protected] > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Mark Miller [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 4:33 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: Hudson nightly build failures due to Clover > >> > >> Heh - I'm with you - I think it would be awesome to fix :) I think > >> the > > other > >> devs think so too. I think that you prodding the issue is a smart > >> move. We > > do > >> want to encourage users to use the nightlies - lets more people try > >> out > > Uwe's > >> questionable code early on ;) - fake failures are a downer though - > >> it > > probably > >> could easily affect how some users perceive the stableness. Though if > >> you are that concerned, you would hopefully read the message and > >> realize that something about the message is off - it says all tests > >> passed. Not ideal, > > but I > >> wonder how much it *actually* hurts trunk/nightly use. I have not > >> seen much mail about it yet... > >> > >> But then again, I work at lucid too, so I'm probably reading the same > > script > >> you are ;) > >> > >> Bottom line though - everyone knows of the problem. An acceptable > >> solution has not yet been found it seems. I guess we are waiting for > >> the > > bug > >> fix to come out. If anyone really wants it fixed before that - prob > >> going > > to > >> have to put on your thinking cap and dive in with some concrete > >> suggestions/action. > >> > >> - Mark > >> > >> On Jan 22, 2011, at 5:40 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > >> > >> > RANT WARNING! RANT WARNING! > >> > > >> > When did Lucid enter the picture? This has nothing to do with Lucid. > >> > > >> > As you say this may all be taken care of with the new Hudson, and > >> > that could be the end of the story, hooray!!!!! I'm perfectly > >> > willing to wait > > and > >> see if it settles out. > >> > > >> > What this *does* have to do with, from my perspective, is that Solr > >> > hasn't had a release in quite a while. There is lots of goodness in > >> > the 3_x and trunk builds. We see comments on the user's list of > >> > "get a nightly build from trunk or 3_X and try it". Which may be > >> > sound advice. But I can absolutely guarantee that a number of > >> > potential users take a single glance at the number of "failures" > >> > (even if they are > >> bogus) reported on Hudson and immediately cross Solr off their list > >> as far > > as > >> using trunk or 3.x. > >> > > >> > It doesn't matter that 1.4.1 would report the same nonsense if it > >> > was continually built. It doesn't matter that 3.x and trunk have > >> > far better automated tests. It doesn't matter that the developers > >> > have confidence. I'm talking perception here, not underlying code > quality. > >> > What matters (and I'm talking perception, remember) is that out of > >> > the last 10 3.x builds 6 have "failed", as have 5 of the last 10 > >> > trunk builds. Which makes it easy to dismiss and/or have an > >> > exaggerated sense > >> of the instability of the 3_x and trunk builds. > >> > > >> > If there were a solution that allowed us to satisfy both the > >> > developers' needs and this perception, I think we should go for it. > >> > > >> > Now, it may well be that the current situation is acceptable to the > >> > community and that our story should continue to be "be patient, > >> > we'll release sometime". But this story is getting old(er). > >> > > >> > But please don't make the mistake of dismissing stodgy corporate > >> > concerns (and I'm speaking of my experience at several companies > >> > here). They may or may not be valid from a technical perspective. > >> > It may even be that stodgy corporations wouldn't use open source > >> > software anyway. It may be that we just don't care. I'm not in a > >> > position to offer any hard evidence either way. Nor, I suspect is > >> > most anyone else > >> given the recent Maven kerfluffle.... > >> > > >> > And I have no good response at all to the reply "Ok, wise guy, dive > >> > in and *make* a release happen". "I'm too busy" is a pretty lousy > >> > excuse > >> <G>... > >> > > >> > OK, rant pretty much over. It would be an easier thing to recommend > >> > trunk or 3_x if there were some commitment to a release date. > >> > Potential users of the newer branches could at least plan on using > >> > one of them with the expectation that the target would stop moving > >> > before their go-live date. But as it is some number of users will > >> > stay on 1.4.1 > > for > >> lack of the ability to plan. > >> > > >> > FWIW > >> > Erick > >> > > >> > On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > The failures from today are just test builds. > >> > > >> > Today also a new Hudson was installed... so please simply wait a > >> > few > > days > >> until it settles. > >> > > >> > If Lucid wants their customer to use nightly builds, they could > >> > setup > > ones > >> on their servers for their customers? For us Hudson mostly a test > >> system > > to > >> check our commits. And clover is part of that. > >> > > >> > If somebody wants to install a trunk build, they should always svn > > checkout > >> and build themselves. Then they can even fix to specific rev no and > >> can always reproduce their build. > >> > > >> > Uwe > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > "Erick Erickson" <[email protected]> schrieb: > >> > > >> > >I don't know what other issues you're referring to, but please, > >> > >please, please do whatever you can to remove "false failures". > >> > >It's highly disconcerting to folks we talk to on the message > >> > >boards to say "Functionality you need is in the nightly builds and > >> > >you can use them, but just ignore the errors the build reports. Really, > it's OK. > >> > >Trust us". > >> > > > >> > >Putting on my corporate IT hat I'd have serious reservations about > >> > >using code that looks broken all the time (even if it's "just a > >> > >build artifact")... > >> > > > >> > >Erick > >> > > > >> > >On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Steven A Rowe <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Clover causes Hudson nightly builds to fail intermittently. > >> > >> This is > >> > >bad, > >> > >> because it looks like Lucene/Solr tests are failing when they > >> > >> are > >> > >not. But > >> > >> Clover is good, so nobody wants to turn it off. > >> > >> > >> > >> One possible solution (apologies if this has already been suggested): > >> > >make > >> > >> new nightly Clover-only Hudson builds, and remove Clover from > >> > >> the > >> > >existing > >> > >> nightly builds. > >> > >> > >> > >> I think that would address all of the issues, wouldn't it? > >> > >> > >> > >> Steve > >> > >> > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Uwe Schindler > >> > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, 28213 Bremen > >> > http://www.thetaphi.de > >> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For > >> > additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > > >> > > >> > >> - Mark Miller > >> lucidimagination.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For > >> additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For > > additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional > commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
