On 16 December 2015 at 18:29, Matthias Clasen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Emmanuele Bassi <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi all; >> >> I've been meaning to discuss this with the release team for a while, >> and I probably already annoyed a bunch of people on IRC, so here goes. >> >> I'd like the r-t to give its blessing to volunteers that decide to act >> as "build sheriffs" on Continuous builds. If we exclude the issues >> with the build machine itself throwing a fit — something that usually >> gets fixed by Colin kicking it — the vast majority of build breakages >> come from GNOME projects issues. >> >> What usually happens when a build goes into perma-red (i.e. it keeps >> failing over the same component) is that somebody on the #testable IRC >> channel (usually me or Colin Walters) tags the module inside the >> Continous manifest, opens a bug, and hopes that a fix get applied and >> communicated on the channel so that the tag gets reverted. >> >> This is not enough, and it does not raise the bar in keeping >> Continuous (and thus GNOME) building. It actually lowers it a fair >> bit, to the effective point that *nobody* cares about Continuous >> builds. >> >> I want this to change. I want to be able to revert failing commits on >> the offending modules, if they are hosted on GNOME infrastructure, if >> they fail for more than N hours, and *then* open a bug about it. >> Ideally, I want to tag only modules that are *not* hosted on GNOME >> infrastructure, as they are beyond our control and commit >> capabilities. In short, I want to ensure that GNOME maintainers become >> a bit more proactive in giving a crap about their modules breaking on >> something that is not their own computers. >> >> This obviously will need to be discussed on d-d-l, but I'd like to get >> some feedback from a limited audience, and hopefully have the release >> team backing this initiative — especially in the hope that we can have >> more than one build sheriff, to cover more time zones, and avoid >> perma-red build failures going on for more than two or three hours, >> instead of half a day. >> > > This sounds ok to me - I think a policy of pinging the relevant > maintainer on irc first before reverting is a good idea (I know I > break things occasionally, and would appreciate a ping if I don't see > the breakage myself). I'd be happy to help out with this as well
Sorry for the late response. I'd like to add if ping is not possible, it would be ok to me to revert the offending commit and send an email to the maintainer of the module explaining why (and probably to the author of the commit as well) Regards, Javier Jardón _______________________________________________ [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.
