public inbox for
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Elena Zannoni <>
To: Phil Muldoon <>
Cc: Mark Wielaard <>,
Subject: Re: Again the build is broken :(
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:14:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Phil Muldoon wrote:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> Hi Elena,
>> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 10:26 -0400, Elena Zannoni wrote:
>>> This leads to the question as to what are the standard development 
>>> platforms for frysk.
>>> FC6 and FC7? Or is older stuff still used? Should there be a 
>>> standard platform where
>>> pre-commit build and tests should be performed.
>> I am personally using Fedora Core 6 (x86_64) as main development
>> platform and test everything (quickly) on Fedora 7 (x86) before
>> committing. But I guess other people have other platforms available. I
>> do appreciate the autobuilder
> Personally I think an auto-builder is here for precisely the purpose 
> shown, in catching architecture-release build combinations breakages. 
> I just do not have the time to test arch * distro. The numbers add up, 
> and I normally test x86 and x86_64 on Fedora 7. There's no reason to 
> spend expensive and scarce human-time checking these, when a build 
> matrix can do it better, especially when the fixes are simple oversights.
> I'd rather have people contributing to features and fixing known bugs 
> and, to that end, making Frysk better.  And letting build matrices 
> build on every platform/release known to us, and linting test-cases 
> and build issues.

Sure, the two things you mention are not mutually exclusive.
However there is a cost to identifying broken builds too, and it seems 
that Mark is drawing the
short straw frequently, since he is usually the first to correct said 
oversights. It takes away some
of his time from development. I haven't suggested that you or anybody 
checks every combination
before checking stuff in. What I have suggested is that, like we used to 
do once upon a time, we
stick with as few development platforms as we can get away with in order 
to minimize the
oversights. So if the platforms supported are FC6 and F7, let's stick 
with those and make
everybody's life easier. If somebody wants to add FC5 to the test grid, 
please do so and contribute
the tests results so that they can be uploaded. Any takers?


  reply	other threads:[~2007-08-24 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-08-24  5:51 Kris Van Hees
2007-08-24  8:16 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-08-24 11:12   ` Mark Wielaard
2007-08-24 11:47     ` Mark Wielaard
2007-08-24 12:34   ` Andrew Cagney
2007-08-24 14:26     ` Elena Zannoni
2007-08-24 14:39       ` Mark Wielaard
2007-08-24 15:17         ` Phil Muldoon
2007-08-24 16:14           ` Elena Zannoni [this message]
2007-08-24 21:00             ` Andrew Cagney
2007-08-28  0:19             ` Phil Muldoon
2007-08-24 16:44         ` Kris Van Hees
2007-08-26 21:21 Kris Van Hees

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).