On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:52:32 +0100
Alexis Ballier <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:26:43 +0100
> Michał Górny <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Dnia 20 listopada 2015 11:19:35 CET, Alexis Ballier
> > <[email protected]> napisał(a):  
> > >On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:21:52 +0100
> > >Michał Górny <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >    
> > >> And here you removed the newest version having ~ia64 keyword,    
> > >breaking    
> > >> revdeps:
> > >> 
> > >> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/1061286/7.html#l885
> > >> 
> > >> I suggest you use eshowkw before removing packages. Please fix or
> > >> revert this.    
> > >
> > >done; thx for the reminder
> > >
> > >
> > >feel free to revert such commits (at least mine) and send me an email
> > >so that i get notified something went wrong in the future
> > >
> > >PS: can't these checks/emails be automated ? it must be very boring
> > >to manually track the culprit from ci output    
> > 
> > Not one that I can think of. This usually requires looking at what
> > changed in both packages, and sometimes profiles. I don't want to
> > blame wrong people just because someone made an irrelevant commit in
> > a package.  
> 
> if CI runs after each commit, it should just be a matter of emailing
> the author when some new breakage appears

If CI were to run after each commit, I'd need a cluster of servers to
run it ;-). On the pretty powerful server donated to the task it takes
7 minutes for a single run, with 16 parallel jobs.

Of course, someone could try to optimize it more, or write a faster
checker. I'd really appreciate if someone had the time to do that ;-).

At some point, I wanted to make it try 'git bisect'-ing when new
failure occurs. However, I don't have the time nor the resources to
work on it. In fact, I don't even have time to make it a little bit
smarter and figure out which packages are failing. Right now, it only
reports changes in number of failures -- if you fix one and break one,
it won't report that.

So, yes, there's a lot of work and nobody to do it.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

Attachment: pgppZyUaFQz_5.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to