On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Arjen de Korte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Citeren Charles Lepple <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> We could have it just email the person who committed the change(s) >> that broke the build, and/or we could email nut-commits. > > I'd say, both.
OK, we'll give that a try. >> For the first option, it would go to your alioth.debian.org alias for >> simplicity. Not sure if the second option makes as much sense for NUT >> because of the granularity of the timers that trigger builds. By the >> time that someone else notices the broken build, the original >> developer would have most likely fixed things. > > That might be the case, but would require that the messages to the > alioth.debian.org alias are forwarded to an e-mail address that is read > often enough to be useful. I'm not sure this is always the case, so to be on > the safe side, it would be good to also include nut-commits here. OK. As a side note, does it make sense to keep the nut-commit list archived? After all, it is just a summary of the information you would get from 'svn log'. >> The master server is running an older version of Buildbot, but we >> might be able to limit the emails to just be "edge-triggered" - i.e., >> only send an email on the first failure until the build has been >> fixed. >> >> Thoughts? > > Please do. I'm going to fire off one build with mode='all', just to test, then I will switch it to mode='problem' as described above. -- - Charles Lepple _______________________________________________ Nut-upsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
