Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Sam Gleske]

Heh, I've seen ofnuts post before so I don't mind onboarding him.

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Pat David  wrote:

> I can vouch for Ofnuts not being an awful malicious actor. But I can’t
> vouch for him not being awful. :D (I kid, I kid).
>
> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 6:19 PM Ofnuts  wrote:
>
> > On 10/06/17 19:29, Sam Gleske wrote:
> > > If anybody is interested in joining me as an admin for maintaining the
> > GIMP
> > > CI server I encourage anybody to reach out to me regardless of your
> skill
> > > level.  Even if you're new to Linux and wish to get better at Linux
> (zero
> > > experience) I'm willing to provide you training and act as a senior for
> > > advice in Linux system administration.
> > >
> >
> > *steps forward*
> > ___
> > gimp-developer-list mailing list
> > List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
> > List membership:
> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
> > List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
> >
> --
> https://patdavid.net
> GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D  18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC
> ___
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-
> developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
>
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Pat David]

I can vouch for Ofnuts not being an awful malicious actor. But I can’t
vouch for him not being awful. :D (I kid, I kid).

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 6:19 PM Ofnuts  wrote:

> On 10/06/17 19:29, Sam Gleske wrote:
> > If anybody is interested in joining me as an admin for maintaining the
> GIMP
> > CI server I encourage anybody to reach out to me regardless of your skill
> > level.  Even if you're new to Linux and wish to get better at Linux (zero
> > experience) I'm willing to provide you training and act as a senior for
> > advice in Linux system administration.
> >
>
> *steps forward*
> ___
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
> List membership:
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
>
-- 
https://patdavid.net
GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D  18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Ofnuts]

On 10/06/17 19:29, Sam Gleske wrote:

If anybody is interested in joining me as an admin for maintaining the GIMP
CI server I encourage anybody to reach out to me regardless of your skill
level.  Even if you're new to Linux and wish to get better at Linux (zero
experience) I'm willing to provide you training and act as a senior for
advice in Linux system administration.



*steps forward*
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Pat David]

Hi Sam!

I would be happy to help out if I can.  Not sure what I can do, but at
least I'll try not to make life harder. ;)

Reach me via email or #gimp.

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:30 PM Sam Gleske  wrote:

> Hello gimp-dev and community,
> I'd like to apologize for my remarks.  I think my pride got in the way a
> bit and I definitely misunderstood the intent of the thread.  Hopefully, my
> reaction does not turn of RedHat for wanting to contribute.  I will take
> this as an opportunity to reflect on my actions and work to continue to
> improve myself.  I definitely want to be seen as a healthy part of this
> community and I really do appreciate and love what the GIMP dev team does.
>
> If anybody is interested in joining me as an admin for maintaining the GIMP
> CI server I encourage anybody to reach out to me regardless of your skill
> level.  Even if you're new to Linux and wish to get better at Linux (zero
> experience) I'm willing to provide you training and act as a senior for
> advice in Linux system administration.
>
> I'll try to keep conversation more productive than my first reply to this
> thread.  I just wanted to publicly announce my apology since I started this
> mess publicly.
>
> Thanks,
> SAM
>
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Jehan Pagès 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Sam,
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Sam Gleske 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jehan Pagès <
> jehan.marmott...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, gregory grey 
> > wrote:
> > >> > I know about build.gimp.org.
> > >> >
> > >> > I just wanted to raise this question to the attention of the team -
> of
> > >> > whether there is a need to support own CI if security is not an
> > >> > issue.It is literally only reason people do that now when we have
> > >> > travis-ci.org/https://circleci.com/etc.Travis is even free for
> > >> > opensource projects.
> > >> >
> > >> > https://build.gimp.org/plugin/disk-usage/ looks pretty full to me,
> > for
> > >> > example. External CI do not have problems with that.
> > >>
> > >> We know of the disk usage issue:
> > >> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=776631
> > >> That's one of the many issues which triggered us into either looking
> > >> for alternative solutions or collaboration or whatever you want.
> > >> Basically we want something which works, is useful and reliable. The
> > >> "need" stops there.
> > >>
> > >> After, which software is it using? I think we don't really care. Now
> > >> obviously we'd prefer our whole infrastructure to run on Free
> > >> Software. And personally I like self-hosting for full control. But
> > >> then there is reality check: it requires contributor time and
> > >> administration skills. So in the end, the CI contributor(s) choose. In
> > >> the GIMP team, our policy is more or less that the one who *do* are
> > >> the one who are in charge of what they do.
> > >>
> > >> Jehan
> > >
> > >
> > > Since I don't appear to be seen as a contributor or "doer" I'm happy to
> > just
> > > step down completely and remove myself from the project.  Much as I
> like
> > > GIMP I don't really like the tone of the thread.
> >
> > I don't really understand what triggers this sudden anger but I see
> > you are quoting one of my last emails. And if that is your trigger,
> > then you got the opposite of its meaning since what it meant is that
> > *you* were the one in charge since *you* are the one who does right
> > now! So whoever who wants something different has to go through you
> > first then help you make things happen.
> >
> > You are considered a contributor and a doer. That's even what I said
> > in my first email (if you haven't, please read it:
> > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/
> > 2016-September/msg00018.html),
> > which was the most important, answering Vladimir and telling him to
> > get in touch with you because you are the one making things happen
> > right now. That's pretty much the definition of both a contributor of
> > the project and a doer.
> >
> > Now if the problem is that we are welcoming additional administrators
> > who want to help (especially if they could be backed by a big company
> > like RedHat), I don't understand. Having additional administrators
> > won't mean at all that we reject you or anything, quite the contrary
> > (cf. again my first email). But if you absolutely want to be alone to
> > administrate (and if that were your issue here), then yes it is a
> > problem. You don't have all the time of the world to maintain
> > perfectly the server (which is no big deal at all! You also have a
> > life and do this voluntarily. We thank you for this), but several
> > admins together could. Same as we are several developers (fortunately
> > since none of us could maintain GIMP as well as now if we were alone).
> >
> > Our problem 

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Sam Gleske]

Hey Michael,
I do not get bugzilla notifications on this but I am actually aware of the
issue and have been working on it for a few days now since I know
gimp-master builds were failing.

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Michael Schumacher  wrote:

> On 10/05/2017 04:08 PM, Jehan Pagès wrote:
>
> > Hello Sam,
>
> [...]
>
> > I don't really understand what triggers this sudden anger but I see
> > you are quoting one of my last emails. And if that is your trigger,
> > then you got the opposite of its meaning since what it meant is that
> > *you* were the one in charge since *you* are the one who does right
> > now! So whoever who wants something different has to go through you
> > first then help you make things happen.
>
> Speaking of which, I think the following is an issue with the build
> environment:
>
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=787115
>
> P.S. Sam, do you receive Bugzilla notification mails for these bugs?
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Michael
> GPG: 96A8 B38A 728A 577D 724D 60E5 F855 53EC B36D 4CDD
> ___
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-
> developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
>
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Sam Gleske]

Hello gimp-dev and community,
I'd like to apologize for my remarks.  I think my pride got in the way a
bit and I definitely misunderstood the intent of the thread.  Hopefully, my
reaction does not turn of RedHat for wanting to contribute.  I will take
this as an opportunity to reflect on my actions and work to continue to
improve myself.  I definitely want to be seen as a healthy part of this
community and I really do appreciate and love what the GIMP dev team does.

If anybody is interested in joining me as an admin for maintaining the GIMP
CI server I encourage anybody to reach out to me regardless of your skill
level.  Even if you're new to Linux and wish to get better at Linux (zero
experience) I'm willing to provide you training and act as a senior for
advice in Linux system administration.

I'll try to keep conversation more productive than my first reply to this
thread.  I just wanted to publicly announce my apology since I started this
mess publicly.

Thanks,
SAM

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Jehan Pagès 
wrote:

> Hello Sam,
>
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Sam Gleske  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jehan Pagès  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, gregory grey 
> wrote:
> >> > I know about build.gimp.org.
> >> >
> >> > I just wanted to raise this question to the attention of the team - of
> >> > whether there is a need to support own CI if security is not an
> >> > issue.It is literally only reason people do that now when we have
> >> > travis-ci.org/https://circleci.com/etc.Travis is even free for
> >> > opensource projects.
> >> >
> >> > https://build.gimp.org/plugin/disk-usage/ looks pretty full to me,
> for
> >> > example. External CI do not have problems with that.
> >>
> >> We know of the disk usage issue:
> >> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=776631
> >> That's one of the many issues which triggered us into either looking
> >> for alternative solutions or collaboration or whatever you want.
> >> Basically we want something which works, is useful and reliable. The
> >> "need" stops there.
> >>
> >> After, which software is it using? I think we don't really care. Now
> >> obviously we'd prefer our whole infrastructure to run on Free
> >> Software. And personally I like self-hosting for full control. But
> >> then there is reality check: it requires contributor time and
> >> administration skills. So in the end, the CI contributor(s) choose. In
> >> the GIMP team, our policy is more or less that the one who *do* are
> >> the one who are in charge of what they do.
> >>
> >> Jehan
> >
> >
> > Since I don't appear to be seen as a contributor or "doer" I'm happy to
> just
> > step down completely and remove myself from the project.  Much as I like
> > GIMP I don't really like the tone of the thread.
>
> I don't really understand what triggers this sudden anger but I see
> you are quoting one of my last emails. And if that is your trigger,
> then you got the opposite of its meaning since what it meant is that
> *you* were the one in charge since *you* are the one who does right
> now! So whoever who wants something different has to go through you
> first then help you make things happen.
>
> You are considered a contributor and a doer. That's even what I said
> in my first email (if you haven't, please read it:
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/
> 2016-September/msg00018.html),
> which was the most important, answering Vladimir and telling him to
> get in touch with you because you are the one making things happen
> right now. That's pretty much the definition of both a contributor of
> the project and a doer.
>
> Now if the problem is that we are welcoming additional administrators
> who want to help (especially if they could be backed by a big company
> like RedHat), I don't understand. Having additional administrators
> won't mean at all that we reject you or anything, quite the contrary
> (cf. again my first email). But if you absolutely want to be alone to
> administrate (and if that were your issue here), then yes it is a
> problem. You don't have all the time of the world to maintain
> perfectly the server (which is no big deal at all! You also have a
> life and do this voluntarily. We thank you for this), but several
> admins together could. Same as we are several developers (fortunately
> since none of us could maintain GIMP as well as now if we were alone).
>
> Our problem was clear: we have only 1 maintainer for continuous
> integration and you don't have unlimited time. So having a second
> person to help could be a good idea. Now if you really leave, we have
> 0 admins, and even if someone else stepped us, we'd be back at square
> 1.
> So this is it. I really want to make things clear because it seems you
> have been completely misinterpreting this 1-year old thread. Anyway
> you are free to choose 

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Michael Schumacher]

On 10/05/2017 04:08 PM, Jehan Pagès wrote:

> Hello Sam,

[...]

> I don't really understand what triggers this sudden anger but I see
> you are quoting one of my last emails. And if that is your trigger,
> then you got the opposite of its meaning since what it meant is that
> *you* were the one in charge since *you* are the one who does right
> now! So whoever who wants something different has to go through you
> first then help you make things happen.

Speaking of which, I think the following is an issue with the build
environment:

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=787115

P.S. Sam, do you receive Bugzilla notification mails for these bugs?


-- 
Regards,
Michael
GPG: 96A8 B38A 728A 577D 724D 60E5 F855 53EC B36D 4CDD
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Jehan Pagès]

Hello Sam,

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Sam Gleske  wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jehan Pagès 
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, gregory grey  wrote:
>> > I know about build.gimp.org.
>> >
>> > I just wanted to raise this question to the attention of the team - of
>> > whether there is a need to support own CI if security is not an
>> > issue.It is literally only reason people do that now when we have
>> > travis-ci.org/https://circleci.com/etc.Travis is even free for
>> > opensource projects.
>> >
>> > https://build.gimp.org/plugin/disk-usage/ looks pretty full to me, for
>> > example. External CI do not have problems with that.
>>
>> We know of the disk usage issue:
>> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=776631
>> That's one of the many issues which triggered us into either looking
>> for alternative solutions or collaboration or whatever you want.
>> Basically we want something which works, is useful and reliable. The
>> "need" stops there.
>>
>> After, which software is it using? I think we don't really care. Now
>> obviously we'd prefer our whole infrastructure to run on Free
>> Software. And personally I like self-hosting for full control. But
>> then there is reality check: it requires contributor time and
>> administration skills. So in the end, the CI contributor(s) choose. In
>> the GIMP team, our policy is more or less that the one who *do* are
>> the one who are in charge of what they do.
>>
>> Jehan
>
>
> Since I don't appear to be seen as a contributor or "doer" I'm happy to just
> step down completely and remove myself from the project.  Much as I like
> GIMP I don't really like the tone of the thread.

I don't really understand what triggers this sudden anger but I see
you are quoting one of my last emails. And if that is your trigger,
then you got the opposite of its meaning since what it meant is that
*you* were the one in charge since *you* are the one who does right
now! So whoever who wants something different has to go through you
first then help you make things happen.

You are considered a contributor and a doer. That's even what I said
in my first email (if you haven't, please read it:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2016-September/msg00018.html),
which was the most important, answering Vladimir and telling him to
get in touch with you because you are the one making things happen
right now. That's pretty much the definition of both a contributor of
the project and a doer.

Now if the problem is that we are welcoming additional administrators
who want to help (especially if they could be backed by a big company
like RedHat), I don't understand. Having additional administrators
won't mean at all that we reject you or anything, quite the contrary
(cf. again my first email). But if you absolutely want to be alone to
administrate (and if that were your issue here), then yes it is a
problem. You don't have all the time of the world to maintain
perfectly the server (which is no big deal at all! You also have a
life and do this voluntarily. We thank you for this), but several
admins together could. Same as we are several developers (fortunately
since none of us could maintain GIMP as well as now if we were alone).

Our problem was clear: we have only 1 maintainer for continuous
integration and you don't have unlimited time. So having a second
person to help could be a good idea. Now if you really leave, we have
0 admins, and even if someone else stepped us, we'd be back at square
1.
So this is it. I really want to make things clear because it seems you
have been completely misinterpreting this 1-year old thread. Anyway
you are free to choose and we still thank you for all what you have
done until now. But just consider things with their proper meaning.
:-)

Jehan

-- 
ZeMarmot open animation film
http://film.zemarmot.net
Patreon: https://patreon.com/zemarmot
Tipeee: https://www.tipeee.com/zemarmot
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list]

On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 12:15:36AM -0700, Sam Gleske wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jehan Pagès 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, gregory grey  wrote:
> > > I know about build.gimp.org.
> > >
> > > I just wanted to raise this question to the attention of the team - of
> > > whether there is a need to support own CI if security is not an
> > > issue.It is literally only reason people do that now when we have
> > > travis-ci.org/https://circleci.com/etc.Travis is even free for
> > > opensource projects.
> > >
> > > https://build.gimp.org/plugin/disk-usage/ looks pretty full to me, for
> > > example. External CI do not have problems with that.
> >
> > We know of the disk usage issue:
> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=776631
> > That's one of the many issues which triggered us into either looking
> > for alternative solutions or collaboration or whatever you want.
> > Basically we want something which works, is useful and reliable. The
> > "need" stops there.
> >
> > After, which software is it using? I think we don't really care. Now
> > obviously we'd prefer our whole infrastructure to run on Free
> > Software. And personally I like self-hosting for full control. But
> > then there is reality check: it requires contributor time and
> > administration skills. So in the end, the CI contributor(s) choose. In
> > the GIMP team, our policy is more or less that the one who *do* are
> > the one who are in charge of what they do.
> >
> > Jehan
> >
> 
> Since I don't appear to be seen as a contributor or "doer" I'm happy to
> just step down completely and remove myself from the project.  Much as I
> like GIMP I don't really like the tone of the thread.

I am not a developer, but I think that there's not any particular "tone"
involved here. Many free/open source project are governed by such "do-ocrazy"

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=do-ocracy

it is just the way it is because of low number of hands involved...
You don't like it? Just do more and talk less and you will find yourself
in charge...

--


Marco Ciampa

I know a joke about UDP, but you might not get it.



 GNU/Linux User #78271
 FSFE fellow #364



___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Sam Gleske]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Jehan Pagès 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, gregory grey  wrote:
> > I know about build.gimp.org.
> >
> > I just wanted to raise this question to the attention of the team - of
> > whether there is a need to support own CI if security is not an
> > issue.It is literally only reason people do that now when we have
> > travis-ci.org/https://circleci.com/etc.Travis is even free for
> > opensource projects.
> >
> > https://build.gimp.org/plugin/disk-usage/ looks pretty full to me, for
> > example. External CI do not have problems with that.
>
> We know of the disk usage issue:
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=776631
> That's one of the many issues which triggered us into either looking
> for alternative solutions or collaboration or whatever you want.
> Basically we want something which works, is useful and reliable. The
> "need" stops there.
>
> After, which software is it using? I think we don't really care. Now
> obviously we'd prefer our whole infrastructure to run on Free
> Software. And personally I like self-hosting for full control. But
> then there is reality check: it requires contributor time and
> administration skills. So in the end, the CI contributor(s) choose. In
> the GIMP team, our policy is more or less that the one who *do* are
> the one who are in charge of what they do.
>
> Jehan
>

Since I don't appear to be seen as a contributor or "doer" I'm happy to
just step down completely and remove myself from the project.  Much as I
like GIMP I don't really like the tone of the thread.
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Vladimír Beneš]

On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 09:26 +0100, gregory grey wrote:
> Hiya, I'm awaiting feedback from Sam on the same topic here. Count me
> in on any related activities.
> 
> One of my questions would be if anyone ever considered using Travis
> CI, which is taken case of by themselves and is used by lots of
> opensource projects.
> 

in NM area we do use Travis to check that it always compile after a
commit
https://travis-ci.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager

Sadly, it's Debian based only (if not mistaken totally) so not much
intersecting Fedora based distro interests :-(. 

Vladimir

> 2017-02-09 23:52 GMT+01:00 Jehan Pagès :
> > Hello Vladimir,
> >
> > Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
> > We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
> > procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
> > last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
> > would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
> > 2.10 release is approaching fast.
> >
> > Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
> > We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Jehan
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès  
> > wrote:
> >> Hi Vladimir,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
> >>> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
> >>> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
> >>> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
> >>> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
> >>> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
> >>> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
> >>> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
> >>> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
> >>> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
> >>> here.
> >>
> >> We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
> >> https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
> >> administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
> >> and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
> >> happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
> >> with the continuous integration broken.
> >>
> >> Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
> >> touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:
> >>
> >> 1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
> >> build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
> >> about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
> >> thinking about more advanced uses.
> >>
> >> 2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
> >> everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
> >> developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
> >> system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
> >> several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed along
> >> when needed. I'd like to avoid black box issues.
> >>
> >> Basically our first goal is to make our system more reliable and
> >> transparent. These are our main worries right now regarding CI.
> >>
> >>> As for coding style we are quite happy users of python Behave [1]
> >>> framework in not only GNOME projects using Dogtail [2] over a11y layer
> >>> or some kind of expect [3] if tests are cli based. For the code
> >>> readability and easiness to code we do use python to connect all these
> >>> together.
> >>> A good example of such code is in gnome-calculator [4] in feature files
> >>> or in gnome-boxes [5].
> >>
> >> I think, us developers, are opened to ideas improving our continuous
> >> integration, on server side and in new tests in our build system. Just
> >> propose us what you have in mind.
> >>
> >> Once again, I think what really matters to us is reliability: if
> >> something is done, it must be meaningful, maintained and not break
> >> tomorrow. CI is meant to help development, not become a burden to us.
> >> :-)
> >> Obviously contributions from RedHat, I would expect some good level of
> >> maintenance. So we are definitely interested.
> >>
> >>> If you have any ideas where our cooperation should start or if you have
> >>> something ready and just not visible to us please point me to the right
> >>> direction.
> >>
> >> Well you are welcome to propose us something, on the mailing list, or
> >> through a bug report… And probably coming discuss this on IRC (#gimp
> >> on irc.gimp.org) would be a first step.
> >> The point is that any idea on this topic will rather be your level of
> >> expertise (or 

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Vladimír Beneš]

Hi Jehan,

On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 23:52 +0100, Jehan Pagès wrote:
> Hello Vladimir,
> 
> Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
> We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
> procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
> last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
> would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
> 2.10 release is approaching fast.
> 
> Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
> We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
> Thanks!
> 

I am really sorry that I haven't responded. We had some personal changes
in the team and it somehow slipped under the table.

Anyways, we are in the process of moving some of our automation to CICO
(CentOS CI) which seems to be pretty stable and what's more interesting,
it's public! https://ci.centos.org/

I have started with NetworkManager
https://github.com/NetworkManager/NetworkManager-ci

It should be pretty well integrated with github and ansible and it's
possible to build other non CentOS environments on top of CentOS
installation (via vagrant or so). I think it's just a matter of being
able to compile without special efforts, right? CentOS and epel should
be pretty stable env.

I will discuss this more with my manager and we will prioritize things
accordingly. I think that moving our code a bit more towards community
(and into public) and you maybe moving your code to reach more stability
to some other env can intersect in CICO. Who knows! CICO seems to be
pretty beefy and equipped with hundreds of bare-metal machines and also
in the process to enable cloud (openstack based) provisioning soon.  

I will keep you updated how NM goes and we can do something about GIMP
too. The biggest concern in our team here was the C code. We are not
much into C as we are pretty more python/gherkin/shell oriented. But if
sanity test code is actively maintained by developers we can deliver
some more integration tests on top of it ideally in the same CI system.

Does it make sense? Ideas?
Vladimir 


> Jehan
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès  
> wrote:
> > Hi Vladimir,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
> >> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
> >> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
> >> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
> >> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
> >> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
> >> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
> >> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
> >> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
> >> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
> >> here.
> >
> > We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
> > https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
> > administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
> > and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
> > happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
> > with the continuous integration broken.
> >
> > Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
> > touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:
> >
> > 1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
> > build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
> > about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
> > thinking about more advanced uses.
> >
> > 2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
> > everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
> > developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
> > system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
> > several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed along
> > when needed. I'd like to avoid black box issues.
> >
> > Basically our first goal is to make our system more reliable and
> > transparent. These are our main worries right now regarding CI.
> >
> >> As for coding style we are quite happy users of python Behave [1]
> >> framework in not only GNOME projects using Dogtail [2] over a11y layer
> >> or some kind of expect [3] if tests are cli based. For the code
> >> readability and easiness to code we do use python to connect all these
> >> together.
> >> A good example of such code is in gnome-calculator [4] in feature files
> >> or in gnome-boxes [5].
> >
> > I think, us developers, are opened to ideas improving our continuous
> > integration, on server side and in new tests in our build system. Just
> > propose us what you 

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Jehan Pagès]

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
> Hi Jehan,
>
> On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 23:52 +0100, Jehan Pagès wrote:
>> Hello Vladimir,
>>
>> Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
>> We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
>> procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
>> last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
>> would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
>> 2.10 release is approaching fast.
>>
>> Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
>> We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
>> Thanks!
>>
>
> I am really sorry that I haven't responded. We had some personal changes
> in the team and it somehow slipped under the table.

No prob.

> Anyways, we are in the process of moving some of our automation to CICO
> (CentOS CI) which seems to be pretty stable and what's more interesting,
> it's public! https://ci.centos.org/

And I see that's Jenkins, which is already what we are using. So I
guess that means it should not be too hard to migrate all our current
builds as is (no?).

> I have started with NetworkManager
> https://github.com/NetworkManager/NetworkManager-ci
>
> It should be pretty well integrated with github and ansible and it's
> possible to build other non CentOS environments on top of CentOS
> installation (via vagrant or so). I think it's just a matter of being
> able to compile without special efforts, right? CentOS and epel should
> be pretty stable env.

Yes compiling, run the tests, send appropriate warnings when a build
fail for us to check logs… Currently we have a IRC bot which tells us
build results (so that we can know immediately when a build fails).
And be reliable. That's the base. :-)

Just to be sure, you are not only proposing us an infrastructure, but
also to maintain the builds, right?

Just the infrastructure would already be awesome, but what we are
especially lacking are contributors and active CI maintainers. As
often developers are not really interested into spending too long on
administrating CI servers, though we definitely appreciate that there
is one! So we really hope your proposition includes maintaining the CI
instance, and if a build breaks for non-code reason (or at least we
think it's not the code!), someone on your side can look into it
quickly. :-)

Of course we'd still appreciate if we can have logins to be able to
log into the CI instance, though we are definitely not planning into
interfering much with the build maintainers.

> I will discuss this more with my manager and we will prioritize things
> accordingly. I think that moving our code a bit more towards community
> (and into public) and you maybe moving your code to reach more stability
> to some other env can intersect in CICO. Who knows! CICO seems to be
> pretty beefy and equipped with hundreds of bare-metal machines and also
> in the process to enable cloud (openstack based) provisioning soon.

Looks very nice. I hope that will work out!

> I will keep you updated how NM goes and we can do something about GIMP
> too. The biggest concern in our team here was the C code. We are not
> much into C as we are pretty more python/gherkin/shell oriented. But if
> sanity test code is actively maintained by developers we can deliver
> some more integration tests on top of it ideally in the same CI system.

Our code is actively maintained. Our test process could be better, but
we do make sure tests always pass and take it seriously (our current
CI does a make check and we fix any broken tests as quickly as we can,
upon discovering them).

> Does it make sense? Ideas?

Yes it does completely make sense. On our side, I think we will all
agree that if you can propose us a process to make your team our new
CI maintainers, we'd be happy to. Our contribution logics is really
that doers are in command.

Jehan

P.S.: I think I can create new read users onto our current Jenkins
instance so I could give you access if needed be for exporting jobs or
whatnot.

> Vladimir
>
>
>> Jehan
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès  
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Vladimir,
>> >
>> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
>> >> Hi all,
>> >> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
>> >> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
>> >> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
>> >> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
>> >> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
>> >> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
>> >> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
>> >> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
>> >> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Jehan Pagès]

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, gregory grey  wrote:
> I know about build.gimp.org.
>
> I just wanted to raise this question to the attention of the team - of
> whether there is a need to support own CI if security is not an
> issue.It is literally only reason people do that now when we have
> travis-ci.org/https://circleci.com/etc.Travis is even free for
> opensource projects.
>
> https://build.gimp.org/plugin/disk-usage/ looks pretty full to me, for
> example. External CI do not have problems with that.

We know of the disk usage issue:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=776631
That's one of the many issues which triggered us into either looking
for alternative solutions or collaboration or whatever you want.
Basically we want something which works, is useful and reliable. The
"need" stops there.

After, which software is it using? I think we don't really care. Now
obviously we'd prefer our whole infrastructure to run on Free
Software. And personally I like self-hosting for full control. But
then there is reality check: it requires contributor time and
administration skills. So in the end, the CI contributor(s) choose. In
the GIMP team, our policy is more or less that the one who *do* are
the one who are in charge of what they do.

Jehan

> Also, build declaration files are much more manageable than pages with
> tabs. Trust me, I'm dealing with huge builds every day.
>
> 2017-02-10 10:05 GMT+01:00 Vladimír Beneš :
>> On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 09:26 +0100, gregory grey wrote:
>>> Hiya, I'm awaiting feedback from Sam on the same topic here. Count me
>>> in on any related activities.
>>>
>>> One of my questions would be if anyone ever considered using Travis
>>> CI, which is taken case of by themselves and is used by lots of
>>> opensource projects.
>>>
>>
>> in NM area we do use Travis to check that it always compile after a
>> commit
>> https://travis-ci.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager
>>
>> Sadly, it's Debian based only (if not mistaken totally) so not much
>> intersecting Fedora based distro interests :-(.
>>
>> Vladimir
>>
>>> 2017-02-09 23:52 GMT+01:00 Jehan Pagès :
>>> > Hello Vladimir,
>>> >
>>> > Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
>>> > We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
>>> > procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
>>> > last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
>>> > would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
>>> > 2.10 release is approaching fast.
>>> >
>>> > Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
>>> > We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
>>> > Thanks!
>>> >
>>> > Jehan
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès  
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> Hi Vladimir,
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>> Hi all,
>>> >>> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
>>> >>> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
>>> >>> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
>>> >>> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
>>> >>> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
>>> >>> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
>>> >>> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
>>> >>> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
>>> >>> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
>>> >>> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
>>> >>> here.
>>> >>
>>> >> We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
>>> >> https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
>>> >> administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
>>> >> and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
>>> >> happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
>>> >> with the continuous integration broken.
>>> >>
>>> >> Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
>>> >> touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:
>>> >>
>>> >> 1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
>>> >> build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
>>> >> about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
>>> >> thinking about more advanced uses.
>>> >>
>>> >> 2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
>>> >> everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
>>> >> developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
>>> >> system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
>>> >> several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed 

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[gregory grey]

I know about build.gimp.org.

I just wanted to raise this question to the attention of the team - of
whether there is a need to support own CI if security is not an
issue.It is literally only reason people do that now when we have
travis-ci.org/https://circleci.com/etc.Travis is even free for
opensource projects.

https://build.gimp.org/plugin/disk-usage/ looks pretty full to me, for
example. External CI do not have problems with that.

Also, build declaration files are much more manageable than pages with
tabs. Trust me, I'm dealing with huge builds every day.

2017-02-10 10:05 GMT+01:00 Vladimír Beneš :
> On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 09:26 +0100, gregory grey wrote:
>> Hiya, I'm awaiting feedback from Sam on the same topic here. Count me
>> in on any related activities.
>>
>> One of my questions would be if anyone ever considered using Travis
>> CI, which is taken case of by themselves and is used by lots of
>> opensource projects.
>>
>
> in NM area we do use Travis to check that it always compile after a
> commit
> https://travis-ci.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager
>
> Sadly, it's Debian based only (if not mistaken totally) so not much
> intersecting Fedora based distro interests :-(.
>
> Vladimir
>
>> 2017-02-09 23:52 GMT+01:00 Jehan Pagès :
>> > Hello Vladimir,
>> >
>> > Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
>> > We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
>> > procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
>> > last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
>> > would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
>> > 2.10 release is approaching fast.
>> >
>> > Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
>> > We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > Jehan
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès  
>> > wrote:
>> >> Hi Vladimir,
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
>> >>> Hi all,
>> >>> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
>> >>> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
>> >>> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
>> >>> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
>> >>> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
>> >>> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
>> >>> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
>> >>> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
>> >>> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
>> >>> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
>> >>> here.
>> >>
>> >> We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
>> >> https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
>> >> administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
>> >> and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
>> >> happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
>> >> with the continuous integration broken.
>> >>
>> >> Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
>> >> touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:
>> >>
>> >> 1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
>> >> build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
>> >> about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
>> >> thinking about more advanced uses.
>> >>
>> >> 2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
>> >> everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
>> >> developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
>> >> system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
>> >> several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed along
>> >> when needed. I'd like to avoid black box issues.
>> >>
>> >> Basically our first goal is to make our system more reliable and
>> >> transparent. These are our main worries right now regarding CI.
>> >>
>> >>> As for coding style we are quite happy users of python Behave [1]
>> >>> framework in not only GNOME projects using Dogtail [2] over a11y layer
>> >>> or some kind of expect [3] if tests are cli based. For the code
>> >>> readability and easiness to code we do use python to connect all these
>> >>> together.
>> >>> A good example of such code is in gnome-calculator [4] in feature files
>> >>> or in gnome-boxes [5].
>> >>
>> >> I think, us developers, are opened to ideas improving our continuous
>> >> integration, on server side and in new tests in our build system. Just
>> >> propose us what you have in mind.
>> >>
>> >> Once again, I think what really matters to us is reliability: if
>> >> something is done, it 

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Alexandre Prokoudine]

build.gimp.org

10 февр. 2017 г. 11:26 пользователь "gregory grey" 
написал:

> Hiya, I'm awaiting feedback from Sam on the same topic here. Count me
> in on any related activities.
>
> One of my questions would be if anyone ever considered using Travis
> CI, which is taken case of by themselves and is used by lots of
> opensource projects.
>
> 2017-02-09 23:52 GMT+01:00 Jehan Pagès :
> > Hello Vladimir,
> >
> > Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
> > We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
> > procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
> > last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
> > would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
> > 2.10 release is approaching fast.
> >
> > Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
> > We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Jehan
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès 
> wrote:
> >> Hi Vladimir,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš 
> wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
> >>> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
> >>> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
> >>> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
> >>> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
> >>> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
> >>> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
> >>> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
> >>> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
> >>> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
> >>> here.
> >>
> >> We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
> >> https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
> >> administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
> >> and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
> >> happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
> >> with the continuous integration broken.
> >>
> >> Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
> >> touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:
> >>
> >> 1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
> >> build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
> >> about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
> >> thinking about more advanced uses.
> >>
> >> 2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
> >> everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
> >> developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
> >> system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
> >> several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed along
> >> when needed. I'd like to avoid black box issues.
> >>
> >> Basically our first goal is to make our system more reliable and
> >> transparent. These are our main worries right now regarding CI.
> >>
> >>> As for coding style we are quite happy users of python Behave [1]
> >>> framework in not only GNOME projects using Dogtail [2] over a11y layer
> >>> or some kind of expect [3] if tests are cli based. For the code
> >>> readability and easiness to code we do use python to connect all these
> >>> together.
> >>> A good example of such code is in gnome-calculator [4] in feature files
> >>> or in gnome-boxes [5].
> >>
> >> I think, us developers, are opened to ideas improving our continuous
> >> integration, on server side and in new tests in our build system. Just
> >> propose us what you have in mind.
> >>
> >> Once again, I think what really matters to us is reliability: if
> >> something is done, it must be meaningful, maintained and not break
> >> tomorrow. CI is meant to help development, not become a burden to us.
> >> :-)
> >> Obviously contributions from RedHat, I would expect some good level of
> >> maintenance. So we are definitely interested.
> >>
> >>> If you have any ideas where our cooperation should start or if you have
> >>> something ready and just not visible to us please point me to the right
> >>> direction.
> >>
> >> Well you are welcome to propose us something, on the mailing list, or
> >> through a bug report… And probably coming discuss this on IRC (#gimp
> >> on irc.gimp.org) would be a first step.
> >> The point is that any idea on this topic will rather be your level of
> >> expertise (or Sam's) than ours, so we are open to suggestions.
> >>
> >> Jehan
> >>
> >>> Looking forward to hearing from you,
> >>> Vladimir
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://pythonhosted.org/behave/tutorial.html
> >>> [2] 

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[gregory grey]

Hiya, I'm awaiting feedback from Sam on the same topic here. Count me
in on any related activities.

One of my questions would be if anyone ever considered using Travis
CI, which is taken case of by themselves and is used by lots of
opensource projects.

2017-02-09 23:52 GMT+01:00 Jehan Pagès :
> Hello Vladimir,
>
> Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
> We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
> procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
> last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
> would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
> 2.10 release is approaching fast.
>
> Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
> We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
> Thanks!
>
> Jehan
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès  
> wrote:
>> Hi Vladimir,
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
>>> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
>>> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
>>> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
>>> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
>>> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
>>> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
>>> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
>>> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
>>> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
>>> here.
>>
>> We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
>> https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
>> administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
>> and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
>> happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
>> with the continuous integration broken.
>>
>> Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
>> touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:
>>
>> 1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
>> build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
>> about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
>> thinking about more advanced uses.
>>
>> 2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
>> everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
>> developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
>> system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
>> several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed along
>> when needed. I'd like to avoid black box issues.
>>
>> Basically our first goal is to make our system more reliable and
>> transparent. These are our main worries right now regarding CI.
>>
>>> As for coding style we are quite happy users of python Behave [1]
>>> framework in not only GNOME projects using Dogtail [2] over a11y layer
>>> or some kind of expect [3] if tests are cli based. For the code
>>> readability and easiness to code we do use python to connect all these
>>> together.
>>> A good example of such code is in gnome-calculator [4] in feature files
>>> or in gnome-boxes [5].
>>
>> I think, us developers, are opened to ideas improving our continuous
>> integration, on server side and in new tests in our build system. Just
>> propose us what you have in mind.
>>
>> Once again, I think what really matters to us is reliability: if
>> something is done, it must be meaningful, maintained and not break
>> tomorrow. CI is meant to help development, not become a burden to us.
>> :-)
>> Obviously contributions from RedHat, I would expect some good level of
>> maintenance. So we are definitely interested.
>>
>>> If you have any ideas where our cooperation should start or if you have
>>> something ready and just not visible to us please point me to the right
>>> direction.
>>
>> Well you are welcome to propose us something, on the mailing list, or
>> through a bug report… And probably coming discuss this on IRC (#gimp
>> on irc.gimp.org) would be a first step.
>> The point is that any idea on this topic will rather be your level of
>> expertise (or Sam's) than ours, so we are open to suggestions.
>>
>> Jehan
>>
>>> Looking forward to hearing from you,
>>> Vladimir
>>>
>>> [1] http://pythonhosted.org/behave/tutorial.html
>>> [2] https://fedorahosted.org/dogtail/
>>> [3] https://pexpect.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
>>> [4] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-calculator/tree/tests
>>> [5] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-boxes/tree/tests
>>>
>>> ___
>>> gimp-developer-list mailing list
>>> List address:  

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Jehan Pagès]

Hello Vladimir,

Unless mistaken, we never had any follow-up on your help proposition.
We are still very interested in any help on automatic testing
procedures. Our current continuous builds have been really shaky these
last months, with server issues for months at a time, and such. We
would appreciate some stable and reliable CI. Even more now that GIMP
2.10 release is approaching fast.

Are you still interested by this topic at Red Hat?
We would welcome any collaboration on the topic. :-)
Thanks!

Jehan


On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 AM, Jehan Pagès  wrote:
> Hi Vladimir,
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
>> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
>> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
>> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
>> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
>> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
>> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
>> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
>> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
>> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
>> here.
>
> We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
> https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
> administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
> and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
> happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
> with the continuous integration broken.
>
> Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
> touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:
>
> 1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
> build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
> about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
> thinking about more advanced uses.
>
> 2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
> everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
> developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
> system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
> several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed along
> when needed. I'd like to avoid black box issues.
>
> Basically our first goal is to make our system more reliable and
> transparent. These are our main worries right now regarding CI.
>
>> As for coding style we are quite happy users of python Behave [1]
>> framework in not only GNOME projects using Dogtail [2] over a11y layer
>> or some kind of expect [3] if tests are cli based. For the code
>> readability and easiness to code we do use python to connect all these
>> together.
>> A good example of such code is in gnome-calculator [4] in feature files
>> or in gnome-boxes [5].
>
> I think, us developers, are opened to ideas improving our continuous
> integration, on server side and in new tests in our build system. Just
> propose us what you have in mind.
>
> Once again, I think what really matters to us is reliability: if
> something is done, it must be meaningful, maintained and not break
> tomorrow. CI is meant to help development, not become a burden to us.
> :-)
> Obviously contributions from RedHat, I would expect some good level of
> maintenance. So we are definitely interested.
>
>> If you have any ideas where our cooperation should start or if you have
>> something ready and just not visible to us please point me to the right
>> direction.
>
> Well you are welcome to propose us something, on the mailing list, or
> through a bug report… And probably coming discuss this on IRC (#gimp
> on irc.gimp.org) would be a first step.
> The point is that any idea on this topic will rather be your level of
> expertise (or Sam's) than ours, so we are open to suggestions.
>
> Jehan
>
>> Looking forward to hearing from you,
>> Vladimir
>>
>> [1] http://pythonhosted.org/behave/tutorial.html
>> [2] https://fedorahosted.org/dogtail/
>> [3] https://pexpect.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
>> [4] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-calculator/tree/tests
>> [5] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-boxes/tree/tests
>>
>> ___
>> gimp-developer-list mailing list
>> List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
>> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
>> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
>
>
>
> --
> ZeMarmot open animation film
> http://film.zemarmot.net
> Patreon: https://patreon.com/zemarmot
> Tipeee: https://www.tipeee.com/zemarmot



-- 
ZeMarmot open animation film
http://film.zemarmot.net
Patreon: https://patreon.com/zemarmot

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP testing cooperation

[Jehan Pagès]

Hi Vladimir,

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Vladimír Beneš  wrote:
> Hi all,
> we (at Red Hat) are very interested in GIMP as we do use it and we also
> do test it (but not the latests releases). We would like to start or
> participate in an automated testing efforts of upstream releases or
> possibly master branch. I am not sure if you have anything ready for
> automated testing of latest code but I wasn't able to find anything. We
> do have some basic test set in-house but coverage is really far away
> from ideal and as we have some resources to invest it would be nice to
> properly cooperate in upstream directly.
> We would be quite interested to set up a CI system if there is none or
> possibly use GNOME continuous if applicable. Definitely open to ideas
> here.

We actually already have a server running Jenkins at
https://build.gimp.org/ for CI. This said, there is currently only one
administrator (Sam Gleske, aka "samrocketman" on IRC) for this server,
and depending on his personal schedule (voluntary contributions), we
happened to have extended periods of time (sometimes up to months)
with the continuous integration broken.

Therefore I guess we would be happy to cooperate. You should get in
touch with Sam. What we discussed recently with Sam was:

1/ We'd like more administrators to share the work because when the
build server gets broken for months without anyone able to do anything
about it, that sucks. And such unreliability makes it useless for even
thinking about more advanced uses.

2/ We'd like to have as much of the CI process, scripts, and
everything documented (probably in a versionned repository) so that
developers are able to at least understand, access and maintain the
system a minimum when system admins disappear (less a problem with
several admins of course), and so that the job can be passed along
when needed. I'd like to avoid black box issues.

Basically our first goal is to make our system more reliable and
transparent. These are our main worries right now regarding CI.

> As for coding style we are quite happy users of python Behave [1]
> framework in not only GNOME projects using Dogtail [2] over a11y layer
> or some kind of expect [3] if tests are cli based. For the code
> readability and easiness to code we do use python to connect all these
> together.
> A good example of such code is in gnome-calculator [4] in feature files
> or in gnome-boxes [5].

I think, us developers, are opened to ideas improving our continuous
integration, on server side and in new tests in our build system. Just
propose us what you have in mind.

Once again, I think what really matters to us is reliability: if
something is done, it must be meaningful, maintained and not break
tomorrow. CI is meant to help development, not become a burden to us.
:-)
Obviously contributions from RedHat, I would expect some good level of
maintenance. So we are definitely interested.

> If you have any ideas where our cooperation should start or if you have
> something ready and just not visible to us please point me to the right
> direction.

Well you are welcome to propose us something, on the mailing list, or
through a bug report… And probably coming discuss this on IRC (#gimp
on irc.gimp.org) would be a first step.
The point is that any idea on this topic will rather be your level of
expertise (or Sam's) than ours, so we are open to suggestions.

Jehan

> Looking forward to hearing from you,
> Vladimir
>
> [1] http://pythonhosted.org/behave/tutorial.html
> [2] https://fedorahosted.org/dogtail/
> [3] https://pexpect.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
> [4] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-calculator/tree/tests
> [5] https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-boxes/tree/tests
>
> ___
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list



-- 
ZeMarmot open animation film
http://film.zemarmot.net
Patreon: https://patreon.com/zemarmot
Tipeee: https://www.tipeee.com/zemarmot
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list