Hi Christian,
Jogi isn't kidding. Currently there isn't a rule for build-breaker on
tinderboxes. This has to be defined, which isn't done until now. We
got a new tooling in EIS and the QA does not know, what to do, when
a one platform is red.
Do you know, if the new tooling in EIS works without any error? Only
then it is possible to define a rule.
I saw many CWS in the last weeks and only some of them are green on
all platforms. But I couldn't found one, without an error.
So what should be the rules to reject a CWS, when 50 errors are shown,
but the color is green, or when 20 errors are shown and it is violet
or when 10 errors exists and it is red.
Only clear rules will help to eliminate these problems. But if a rule
is defined and exist, all CWS has to be handled like this.
Currently I do not know, what the numbers and colors should tell me.
A clear definition will help here.
Regards,
Thorsten
Christian Lohmaier wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 10:33:03AM +0100, Joerg Sievers wrote:
Christian Lohmaier wrote:
Good (or rather bad) example of wasted ressources:
The build breaks on Mac. This has been reported in EIS. But you simply
ignored this and went one with the big testing.
And even now you still ignore the breaker without even finding it
necessary to mention it with any word.
that is not the truth: I have written a sentence there that I have seen
it
You're kidding, right? I wrote that message on Wed, 14 Mar 2007, and now
look at the date of your comment: Was posted today.
I postet the note about the build-breaker on Jan 21, on Feb 10 and again
on Mar 9. And only now you acknowlege to have read it?
but I have no rule, no process which hinders - from QA point of view
- the nomination.
And you're kidding even more: You have no rule that tells you that you
should reject anything that breaks the build? That cannot be true.
---------- Comment from jsi Do Mrz 15 09:15:20 +0100 2007 ----------
I have no idea if a red Tinderbox-entry will block something but I have
no rule that I have to look at it. From QA point of view the CWS is okay
for integration.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to say: QA itself should not be bothered to check tinderbox
status themselves, then fine. But: I already checked the status for you
and told you it breaks. [1]
_Release Engineering_ should have an interest to get the builds done on
all platforms otherwise they get more work to do.
[1] And even looking yourself whether it breaks or not is easy. EIS has
the tinderboxstatus built-in now. Just look at the color of the columns.
If somebody is color-blind and cannot distinguish the green from the
red, then just ask me to change the colors.
ciao
Christian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
