From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17003 invoked by alias); 23 May 2007 21:47:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 16981 invoked by uid 22791); 23 May 2007 21:47:14 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from agminet01.oracle.com (HELO agminet01.oracle.com) (141.146.126.228) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 May 2007 21:47:12 +0000 Received: from rgmsgw01.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw01.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.51]) by agminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l4NLl1oH027230; Wed, 23 May 2007 16:47:01 -0500 Received: from ca-server1.us.oracle.com (ca-server1.us.oracle.com [139.185.48.5]) by rgmsgw01.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.2.4) with ESMTP id l4NLkxPA007840 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 23 May 2007 15:47:00 -0600 Received: from kvanhees by ca-server1.us.oracle.com with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hqyfb-0003iI-B4; Wed, 23 May 2007 14:46:59 -0700 Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 07:50:00 -0000 From: Kris Van Hees To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Kris Van Hees , frysk Subject: Re: Automated build-and-test summary report (2007/05/23) Message-ID: <20070523214658.GB16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> References: <20070523141034.GA16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <46545CB3.6000509@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46545CB3.6000509@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q2/txt/msg00198.txt.bz2 I may be missing something, but I honestly do not understand the issue here. Obviously, an automated build-and-test system that performs nightly builds is hardly any use if the results are only emailed out once a week. The continuing existence of tests that show intermittent failures, and the continued failure of the dist-builds (that you in fact suggested be added to the list of configuration) indicates that we (as developers) are not detecting and reporting all problems. The automated system is performing a full-scale test, and extracts the relevant output from the tests, consolidating those in clear reports. However, if receiving a daily report in email places an undue burden on you, I can certainly disable the scheduling of nightly builds for Frysk. There is no point in running tests when you don't want the results distributed to the developers. Cheers, Kris On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 11:24:35AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Kris, > > Does this really need to be semi-daily? I thought it was happily > posting weekly summaries. As developers we can more directly detect and > report immediate problems. > > Andrew >