Re: automated packaging

On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 12:26 +, Petr Pisar wrote: > Or are these test failures expected to be delivered through FMN only? This is currently how they are handled. I have my FMN settings configured to send these to me over IRC and that works well for me. However, I don't believe that is the

Re: automated packaging

On 2017-03-24, Randy Barlow wrote: > The JavaScript that loads the taskotron results from resultsdb is in > Bodhi, not taskotron: > You are right. It looks like NoScript Firefox extensions blocks AJAX requests too. Maybe because the response contains a javascript

Re: automated packaging

On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 13:38 +, Petr Pisar wrote: > third-party == from different host (bodhi.fedoraproject.org. != > taskotron.fedoraproject.org.). The JavaScript that loads the taskotron results from resultsdb is in Bodhi, not taskotron:

Re: automated packaging

On 2017-03-24, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:11:22AM +, Petr Pisar wrote: >> > It would be under the "Automated Test Results", >> >> So this the stuff loaded by a third-party javascript code that I have >> disabled. That explains why I wasn't

Re: automated packaging

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:11:22AM +, Petr Pisar wrote: > > It would be under the "Automated Test Results", > > So this the stuff loaded by a third-party javascript code that I have > disabled. That explains why I wasn't able to see it anywhere. I don't think we use any "third-party"

Re: automated packaging

On 2017-03-24, Dan Horák wrote: > On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:10:47 + (UTC) > Petr Pisar wrote: > >> On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote: >> > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: >> >> That's not true, there are

Re: automated packaging

On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 09:54 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 09:20 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > > > > > FWIW, I would be *extremely* reluctant to use something that big > > > that's > > > a) written in shell script (ugh) and b) has no tests. > > > > How did you

Re: automated packaging

On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 08:27 +0100, Dan Horák wrote: > On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:10:47 + (UTC) > Petr Pisar wrote: > > > On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > > > That's not true,

Re: automated packaging

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:10:47 + (UTC) Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > >> That's not true, there are ABI checks in the sidebar on koji. > > > > Sorry, in the

Re: automated packaging

On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: >> That's not true, there are ABI checks in the sidebar on koji. > > Sorry, in the sidebar in *Bodhi*. Could you be more specific (URL or so)? I cannot find it on Bodhi web

Re: automated packaging

On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 09:20 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > > > FWIW, I would be *extremely* reluctant to use something that big > > that's > > a) written in shell script (ugh) and b) has no tests. > > How did you figure the (b) part? The package itself has extensive > tests. I meant

Re: automated packaging

On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > That's not true, there are ABI checks in the sidebar on koji. Sorry, in the sidebar in *Bodhi*. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: automated packaging

On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 09:20 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > Unless you mean about fedora testing in general. It is true fedora > provides no practical infrastructure for testing. Even basic checks > like ABI checks for libraries are missing on updates; that's sad but > shouldn't stop

Re: automated packaging

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:02:28AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017, at 06:00 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > > Hi, > > For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and > > package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single > > keypress

Re: automated packaging

On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 09:35 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 23.3.2017 v 09:23 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos napsal(a): > > What I was > > interested is whether there is plan or intention of improving the > > fedora infrastructure for packagers by making these part of our > > daily > > work-flow. > >

Re: automated packaging

Dne 23.3.2017 v 09:23 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos napsal(a): > What I was > interested is whether there is plan or intention of improving the > fedora infrastructure for packagers by making these part of our daily > work-flow. It depends. :) I use Tito daily and it saves me a lot of time. However

Re: automated packaging

On Wed, 2017-03-22 at 11:36 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 22.3.2017 v 11:00 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos napsal(a): > > Hi, > >  For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and > > package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single > > keypress using the cockpituous

Re: automated packaging

On Wed, 2017-03-22 at 08:51 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2017-03-22 at 11:00 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > > Hi, > >  For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and > > package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single > > keypress using the

Re: automated packaging

On 22-03-17 19:18, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 04:22:08PM +0100, Patrick Laimbock wrote: Thanks for compiling that list. The Tito link gave a 404 so I edited it to point to https://github.com/dgoodwin/tito and also added centpkg which is used by CentOS. Does centpkg fit in

Re: automated packaging

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 04:22:08PM +0100, Patrick Laimbock wrote: > Thanks for compiling that list. The Tito link gave a 404 so I edited > it to point to https://github.com/dgoodwin/tito and also added > centpkg which is used by CentOS. Does centpkg fit in this category? Isn't it basically just

Re: automated packaging

On Wed, 2017-03-22 at 11:00 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > Hi, > For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and > package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single > keypress using the cockpituous (sic) tools [0]. These tools hide quirks > and requirements

Re: automated packaging

On 22-03-17 16:02, Colin Walters wrote: On Wed, Mar 22, 2017, at 06:00 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: Hi, For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single keypress using the cockpituous (sic) tools [0]. These

Re: automated packaging

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017, at 06:00 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > Hi, > For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and > package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single > keypress using the cockpituous (sic) tools [0]. These tools hide quirks > and

Re: automated packaging

Dne 22.3.2017 v 11:00 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos napsal(a): > Hi, > For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and > package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single > keypress using the cockpituous (sic) tools [0]. These tools hide quirks > and requirements of the