+1 Tester can use the snapshot build to verify fixed bug and do regression test. Currently, we have Linux 32/64 and Windows installer for AOO trunk stream at buildbot http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ but lack of Mac installer. And also there is no build for branch stream. It will be great to have snapshot build available for us.
2012/6/15 Jürgen Schmidt <[email protected]> > On 6/14/12 11:33 PM, Andrew Rist wrote: > > > > > > On 6/14/2012 8:20 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > >> On 6/14/12 5:04 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > >>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:53:51AM -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > >>>> I've seeing a lot of bug fixes coming in. This is great! > >>>> > >>>> But none of us are perfect. Sometimes bug fixes don't work or fixing > >>>> one bug causes another problem. That is why we test. And it is > >>>> best to test a bug fix before too much time has elapsed. > >>>> > >>>> Would it make sense to agree on a date to post an updated dev > >>>> snapshot, so we can verify the bug fixes and ensure that no new > >>>> instability has been introduced? Maybe get into the practice of doing > >>>> this regularly, e.g., every 1 or 2 weeks or something. > >>> IMO first we should decide if building 3.4.1 alphas/betas or 3.5 > >>> Developer > >>> Snapshots; yes, the naming is a mess, we should clear this up, also > >>> clear the page > >>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots > >>> > >>> IIRC in OOo times, Developer Snapshots where builds from the main code > >>> line, for example http://hg.services.openoffice.org/DEV300/ > >>> Betas where from the release code line, for example > >>> http://hg.services.openoffice.org/OOO340/ > >>> http://hg.services.openoffice.org/OOO330/ > >>> http://hg.services.openoffice.org/OOO320/ > >>> > >>> I guess we could build both, at different intervals, a 3.5 Dev.Snap. > per > >>> month and a 3.4.1 beta every week or two, for example. > >>> > >> When you see my proposed schedule for 3.4.1 I have proposed to start dev > >> builds for 3.4.1 with the beginning of June. We are working on setting > >> up some local machines that allow us to automate this a little bit. I > >> hope we can start at least next week with this. > >> > >> And I agree to Ariel that it make sense to start with dev builds for 3.5 > >> (trunk) as well. And ideally we can use the binaries from the build bots > >> directly. As I learned today we changed the configure flags already and > >> we should check if we can these builds directly. Or if not we should > >> check what we need to fix to make them usable. That would of course make > >> things easier. > > I think the builds from the buildbot could be directly used. I think > > there are a couple of things that would need to be changed: > > - create separate builds for 3.4.1 and trunk > > - create weekly 'dev builds' that will be a bit different than the > > nightlies, with extra steps required and correct configure options. > > - create specific build for weekly rat + coverity + ??? for code > > analysis that does not need to be run daily (or nightly) > > > I agree that makes absolutely sense. > > What do you think how much effort is it to adapt the existing scripts to > support this? I have still no knowledge about the build bots, their > setup... I should learn more about it ;-) > > We have to check how such a setup will work when we know more details > about the code signing for our Windows binaries. That won't be easy from > a security perspective... > > Do you know which compiler we use on the builds bots, do we use the > professional version? We should ensure to enable ATL and ActiveX on the > build bots as well. > > Juergen > > > A. > > > >> > >> Juergen > >> > > > > > -- Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
