On 03/01/10 14:38, Bernd Eilers wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
[... snip ....]
@Bernd: Note that this will render the CWSCheckAPI entries on a CWS
EIS page meaningless. Unlike cwscheckapi, subsequenttests does not
report any status to EIS.
I can mark the CWSCheckAPITest as unavailable in the EIS Database so it
will only be shown on those CWS where a status has actually been
reported in the past. I think I should do this.
Not sure how best to do the transition. In principle, CWSs other than
sb118 that are based on code versions where sb118 has not been
integrated should offer CWSCheckAPI tests, while others should not.
May I ask why subsequenttests does not report it´s status to EIS? Is
this a political or technical issue? Or is it just a currently missing
feature which is planned to be added?
The intention is that those tests are run as one step of any ordinary
build, including buildbot/tinderbox builds. That way, the
buildbot/tinderbox status information in a CWS's EIS page will already
give the relevant information.
-Stephan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
