Hi Thorsten,
If you want a formal process than I would propose to get the following
into QA processes:
Don´t nominate a CWS if tinderbox status is red without checking
together with the owner first if it´s OK that the status is red.
(Details about what the owner can do are in other mails in this thread -
maybe the Release Status Meeting might want to create developer
processes for those things too)
And in case we don´t have that already as a general rule in our
"processes" i´d like to propose a rule to engage in something called
communication when something looks like it maybe wrong or is not
understood ;-)
I do believe a rule to not nominate when known to break on a platform
already is there in our processes, is it?
Kind regards,
Bernd
Thorsten Ziehm wrote:
Hi Bernd,
it's a difference between announcing something or bring it into our
processes. Currently it is only announced, but nobody bring it into
our processes.
Perhaps next week in Release Status Meeting the next steps can be
discussed. I think this could be the right place to discuss the
further steps.
Thorsten
Bernd Eilers wrote:
Hi there!
Christian Lohmaier wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 02:08:04PM +0100, Frank Schönheit - Sun
Microsystems Germany wrote:
[...]
That's in fact a problem. Those tinderbox stati in EIS have been
introduced without extensive explanation.
Wrong. It has been announced here and on at least the tools-ML.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg03936.html
Right! And in addition to the introduction on this list and on the
tools list I have also blogged about it here:
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/eis_incompatible_changes_tinderbox_termite
To repeat the important sentences from that blog entry here:
"Besides general overview pages Tinderbox does also provide status
information for individual ChildWorkspaces which has been integrated
into the ChildWorkspace Overview pages. When a Tinderbox client has
build the ChildWorkspace the latest status of the build is being shown
there.
Watch out for anything red in such status messages. A red status
indicates that the build failed and this needs further investigation.
If you wonder about the error count in a green status message that´s
most likely the tinderbox script just counting normal occurrences of
the word error in the build log and nothing to really worry about."
In short that is just ignore the error count and use the color as
indicator wether something did go wrong.
I will ask on the tinderbox mailing list what people think about
removing that error count as it´s obviously only leading to confusion
and is not really displaying any useful information. I believe
currently something like a message about compiling ErrorDialog.cxx in
the Log file would currently be counted as an Error occurance while
that´s just a pretty normal thing.
Another important note to tinderbox stati: you should ignore the
tinderbox status if the CWS is not yet "ready for QA" as the CWS may
be in a state where incomplete changes have been committed except if
you are the owner of the CWS and do believe you have comitted complete
buildable changes to the CWS.
> [...]
Kind regards,
Bernd Eilers
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
