Hi all,
Gerrit for SimRel has been widely used by many projects and the
validation checks that come with Simrel have successfully caught a bunch
of issues before the had the opportunity to break the Simultaneous
Release. Gerrit and Code-Review can have an incredible effect on
software
I would not say "stability/quality" has improved (depending on what that
means), but it is clear that it avoids "breaking HEAD" of the
'simrel.build' repository. And that is great.
It is already 'required' that contributors "go though Gerrit" ... but it
is allowed that the 'review/validation'
On 01/07/2016 06:20 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
By the way, some time ago, we discussed the idea of policies about
contributing immutable URLs and fully qualified versions to
Simrel, in order to provide predictability and reproducibility.
Have these ideas been abandoned? If we were
-1 to forcing the use of refs/for/x
The validation results are unreliable as the aggregation build is not safely
reproducible. A failed validation result is just as likely to be due to someone
changing their already-contributed repository.
Thanks,
- Konstantin
From: Mickael Istria
Sent:
Interesting. When did this happen? There are many contributions still using
mutable URLs.
- Konstantin
From: Doug Schaefer
Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 9:20 AM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Enforce Gerrit for Simrel?
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 12:14 PM,
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik <
konstantin.komissarc...@oracle.com> wrote:
> -1 to forcing the use of refs/for/x
>
>
>
> The validation results are unreliable as the aggregation build is not
> safely reproducible. A failed validation result is just as likely to be due
>
On 01/07/2016 07:33 PM, Stephan Herrmann wrote:
I like gerrit for long-running tests so I can start the next task
while tests are still running on the server.
Running b3 validation in the b3 editor is not what I call a
long-running test,
I rather feel it convenient to validate locally, before
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Mickael Istria wrote:
> On 01/07/2016 06:08 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
>
> -1 to forcing the use of refs/for/x
>
> The validation results are unreliable as the aggregation build is not
> safely reproducible. A failed validation result
I like gerrit for long-running tests so I can start the next task
while tests are still running on the server.
Running b3 validation in the b3 editor is not what I call a long-running test,
I rather feel it convenient to validate locally, before pushing to the server.
Does the Gerrit validation