> we need a way to improve the state of our tree.
Agreed.
> My idea is simple: send a summary email to this list with the current
> state of the tree.
>
> this should have a list of the build failures, ranked by the number of
> other builds that depend on it.
Not ranked, but isn't this this? The 'affected' is intended to rank. I know
there is an overestimate in this number, but I didn't think there was an
underestimate [see below].
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/project_todos.html
I look at this page (like today) and focus on the one(s) w/ the highest
number -- hence the two mails I've sent today.
> For example:
>
> excalibur-logging is breaking basically 40% of our tree and nobody
> gives a damn.
>
> nekohtml is not even there and again, it breaks a huge part of the
> tree thru HTTPUnit that depends on it
Not sure these match what I see at:
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/project_todos.html
Is your 'view' more accurate? Can you elaborate on how you calculated these?
> My point it: we need a way to focus on hotspots.
Yup.
> Cocoon hasn't been built for 6 months because of dependency failures.
Funny, that was exactly what I was looking at today. I think an analysis of
this (known to be bloated) table gives us a view of how close something is
to getting built. Maybe we need to review the numbers of projects in various
states for here & see if this helps us detect non-lost-causes.
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/cocoon-2.1/cocoon_details.html#Full+Project+Dependencies
> I'm committed to make this change, who's with me?
I'm committed to your goal. I want 100% Gumpage as the norm & failures to
stand out. I'll help where I can.
regards,
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
