2015-02-02 16:31 GMT+01:00 Stefan Rossbach <srossb...@arcor.de>:
> So the following happened:
>
> I amended Christians UI patch for making the UI plugin an OSGi module.
>
> http://saros-build.imp.fu-berlin.de/gerrit/#/c/2069/
>
> As you can see in his original patch he already changed the build.xml file
> using Ant4Eclipse.
>
> I looked at the Jenkins Gerrit Job and it was already correctly
> configured. The build passed and so I submitted the patch.
>
> I did not see any dedicated UI job and so I thought that this will be
> added later after the OSGi stuff is added.
>
> The problem is that the IntelliJ and Saros Job already build this UI
> plugin. I do not not really understand why this has to be done twice.
>
The reason is that the master job is splitted into E and I job and the
IntelliJ job cannot use the needed libs inside the jar artifacts (unless
they would be extracted).
So rebuilding is the easiest solution because this way the same IntelliJ
Ant script can be used for both Gerrit and master.
> Neverless the configuration of these jobs are / were configured to
> actually call the old build.xml with the needed parameters.
>
> I already deleted the UI plugin stuff from the Saros build but I am not
> going to touch the IntelliJ one.
>
> And BTW it is really a bad idea to build something else in the Saros Build
> job because the STF regression jobs simply take
> all produced artifacts from the last build (Saros/C and Saros/E) and
> deploy them to the Eclipse installations of our both test machines
> before running the regression.
>
As Saros/E will have a dependency to the ui-module, I will have add the
UI-plugin stuff again (configured accordingly). BTW the resulting UI.jar
does not need to be an artifact of that job.
And as for the new patch set. It is the same as Christians. I just removed
> the UI dependency in Saros/E for now and added some Eclipse Autoformat
> stuff and so
> regardless of the changes the same build errors would have occurred unless
> someone had changed the Jenkins Jobs accordingly before committing this
> patch.
>
>
Guess what would have happened if you had notified me that you are planning
to bypass the review process :)
It is frustrating that you submit your patchsets without giving anyone the
chance to comment even if it is an amendment to one my commits.
And please stop going around blaming or insulting people.
BTW you are invited to ask questions if you don't know why we did something
or what we are planning to do as you are not able to attend our team
meetings in person. I am happy to answer those questions.
Regards,
Christian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
_______________________________________________
DPP-Devel mailing list
DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel
