FWIW:
CC is interval based. It wakes up, say every 30 seconds (or 30 sec after last build), and does a check of the repos to see if any commits have happened. If a commit has happened 'recently' (based on quiet period setting), it will go back to sleep for some amount of time before trying again. It has worked very well for us - I can't remember any build failures due to inconsistent state. But, if the commits are frequent enough the quiet interval would be sufficiently long to give it little advantage over the lubega hourlies.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott M Stark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 10:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Continuous Integration
Right, a build initiated on checkin is in general guarenteed to fail due
to an inconsistent view of the repository. Start bitching more about
specific problems due to checkins that developers are not fixing. If
it continues unabated the offending developer is gone.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 7:26 AM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Continuous Integration
> Aside from using cruise control, how does this differ from what chris
> kimpton already has set up(http://www.lubega.com/), which runs the
> testsuite at least once a day and I think does hourly builds? How does
> your proposed system distinguish a broken build from a lengthy multi-part
> checkin where writing the comments on the next chunk takes 10 minutes?
>
> <rant>
> I'm certainly not averse to a better system, however one of the drawbacks
> of the current system is that the results are mostly ignored: people will
> often fix problems that break the build the next day, but most people seem
> to feel no obligation to do anything about changes that say only break 50
> or 100 tests (ok I'm probably exaggerating, but not by enough).
> </rant>
>
> How would your system apportion blame when there are several checkins at
> the same time (either interlaced or within less time than it takes to
> checkout and do a clean build) and the build breaks?
>
> Although I might sound negative, I actually think what chris has set up has
> been incredibly useful and improvements or a better system would be
> wonderful.
>
> thanks
>
> david jencks
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: AMD - Your access to the experts
on Hammer Technology! Open Source & Linux Developers, register now
for the AMD Developer Symposium. Code: EX8664
http://www.developwithamd.com/developerlab
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
