On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Roy Stogner <royst...@ices.utexas.edu>wrote:
> Nick Malaya set up something similar over here with the TACC systems -
> longhorn.tacc builds and tests our manufactured solution library MASA
> with the Portland Group compilers, and reports the results back to our
> "master" server where it gets integrated into the same waterfall, web
> interface, log archiving etc. as everything else.
>
Sounds good.
> It doesn't look like Buildbot will want to chat over the network with
> non-Buildbot slaves (Nick claims that the simplest way to do things is
> to install buildbot, test it with a local master/slave configuration,
> then point it to the remote master instead), but we'd *love* to be
> able to see the stdout/stderr from any cases where other developers'
> patches break your tests. Having to iterate back and forth between
> "old PBC code with a theoretical failure case" and "new PBC code which
> fails your tests" without even getting to see your tests' output
> wasn't fun.
>
Right - we would just install BuildBot over here and have it return results
to you.
> Is that going to be controlled-information-kosher, though? E.g. just
> tripping an assert can spit a stack trace to stderr, which wouldn't be
> enough to make me worry but might be seen as violating others' rules.
> And if we might ever actually had a *malicious* developer, there's the
> possibility of 'add system("find source | xargs cat") to LibMeshInit,
> push to devel, go check BuildBot to see what we hooked' to worry
> about.
It won't be a problem. We won't test _all_ the codes over here. Just
MOOSE (our MOOSE test suite has over 350 individual regression tests in it
with no pesky controlled information).
> Ben and I (at least) haven't been getting the automatic emails that
> libMesh pull requests are supposed to generate; you might want to ping
> -devel at the same time until we get that sorted out.
Will do.
> Now, if I submit a pull request and everyone is ok with it... I can
>> do my own pull into the officially libMesh git clone on my
>> workstation and merge to master and push on my own.
>>
>
> I'd have interpreted a pull request as an invitation for *anyone* to
> do the merge to master & push. Not a good idea?
>
I think that's fine. I think a pull request could be that open invitation.
I was just pointing out that I don't expect others to have to do more work
on my behalf. If everyone just wants to say "looks good" to my pull
requests then I can do the leg work of getting it in. If someone says
"looks good I merged it" then I'm fine with that as well ;-)
Derek
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial
Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support
Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services
Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
