Not only next/master/maint, but topic branches must also be supported. I'd prefer keeping the references in the repo instead as Marie suggested.
Martin On 12 June 2013 21:27, Garth N. Wells <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12 June 2013 20:22, Marie E. Rognes <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 06/12/2013 03:46 PM, Garth N. Wells wrote: > >> > >> There is something amiss with how the FFC test references are being > >> updated, which is causing the Buildbot on master to fail. Could > >> someone who is familiar with the test reference uploading/downloading > >> take a look? > >> > > > > It seems that something is wrong with the tags. Did you use the scripts > to > > upload the reference data? > > > > Yes. > > > As an aside, in order to test FFC in next (or maint), we would also need > to > > distinguish between > > a master/next/maint branch of the ffc-reference-data repository. > > This likely the problem. I assumed that the scripts would have been > written to handle this. > > Garth > > > However, I > > would suggest that we just put the references back into the FFC repo in > > order to make the reference testing simpler and more robust again. > > > > -- > > Marie > > _______________________________________________ > > fenics mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics > _______________________________________________ > fenics mailing list > [email protected] > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics >
_______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
