From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24143 invoked by alias); 30 May 2007 13:23:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 24136 invoked by uid 22791); 30 May 2007 13:23:30 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 May 2007 13:23:26 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4UDMONq028428; Wed, 30 May 2007 09:22:24 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4UDMOHN013853; Wed, 30 May 2007 09:22:24 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4UDMM5P016367; Wed, 30 May 2007 09:22:22 -0400 Message-ID: <465D7AA7.8050009@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 13:31:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070301) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Van Hees CC: frysk@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Automated build-and-test summary report (2007/05/23) References: <20070523141034.GA16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <46545CB3.6000509@redhat.com> <20070523214658.GB16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <4655CCF6.8080607@redhat.com> <20070524192441.GC16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <465B262C.5090104@redhat.com> <465C6197.6030405@redhat.com> <20070530011241.GB14523@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <20070530011241.GB14523@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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/msg00221.txt.bz2 Kris, This isn't about the need for a test-farm, or about methodology, and certainly isn't some sort of "personal" objection. It is just about considering the most effective way to communicate results to its intended audience. frysk@ is used both as a discussion and status list. Having weekly testing results identifying unstable tests (based on some history) would certainly be part of that. However, is drowning the list with daily results really that reasonable? Mark has suggested, and what many other projects have adopted, is a dedicated frysk-testresults list (and like frysk-bugzilla and frysk-cvs, it will have Reply-To: pointing back to frysk@). Both your and any other daily test reports can go there. Does this sound reasonable? Andrew