David Marker <David.Marker at Sun.COM> writes: > The scripts are starting to take shape now. > > We have most of the hooks we want. > Just to be clear, we are aiming for parity this time around. > That means we check RTI in changegroup not pretxnchangegroup. > So push without RTI approval means backout (just as it does today). > Still missing: cstyle check.
Is that a similar issue to that with RTI? > I remain concerned about the "hook window". I know its small, but > having sanity.py take several seconds still means there is a chance > for somebody to pull from the gate and get a changeset that is > destined for rejection. I still suggest locking in the hooks. > Mark had begun testing the hooks before he left for vacation. > > I also got a first stab at clone update script. This one shouldn't be > as vulnerable to the "hook window", as I make it wait before > determining which revision to pull over to the clone. ... which would require locking, surely, so you have what you'd need in general? > Still to be done: > set up our test bed to do clone updates, nightly builds, incremental > builds. > > If it can do all that we will be in good shape. Yes that means that > things like > the biweekly build may be a manual operation for b97. But that's my problem. > That won't affect ON developers. Which bits of that are you lacking? I *think* that many of the things that happen under there are at least simple in concept. > I'll be scripting all weekend. > And Mark and I will hit the testing hard starting Monday (when he returns > from vacation). > > I'm not setting up webrevs, but I keep the repo fairly current as I add > things: > ssh://anon at hg.opensolaris.org/hg/scm-migration/onnv-gk-tools > > All comments are welcome. > If you are internal we do have a "fake gate" set up that we play around > with. > > I am not spending time worrying about how we are going to get users > public ssh keys. Hopefully when Mike gets back he can help us take > what hg.os.o already has to seed the gate. That's a really, really small time window between Mike returning and _97, isn't there? -- Rich
