From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 63669 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2017 23:19:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 63659 invoked by uid 89); 15 Dec 2017 23:19:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=supervision, timely X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 23:19:54 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E0ED5D697; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 23:19:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unused-10-15-17-193.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.17.193]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 055D360F8B; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 23:19:52 +0000 (UTC) From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: David Edelsohn Cc: Yao Qi , GDB Patches , Edjunior Machado Subject: Re: [BuildBot] Notifications disabled for Debian-s390x-* and Fedora-ppc64*-* builders References: <87d13g6r5t.fsf@redhat.com> <878te46pk4.fsf@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 23:19:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (David Edelsohn's message of "Fri, 15 Dec 2017 17:40:43 -0500") Message-ID: <874loro9yf.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-12/txt/msg00397.txt.bz2 On Friday, December 15 2017, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Yao Qi wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:34 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: >>> >>> But the irony in your message should not be ignored. You implicitly >>> express that the buildbots are ignored, except possibly x86 and Try >>> Builds on x86, while you proceed to ask for additional participation. >> >> How do you get such implicit message? That is your bias. We still have >> aarch64 and aarch32 buildslaves, they are quite stable, and catches >> some build failures with g++ 4.8 and regressions. >> >> These builders are disabled because they are useless. Sergio asks for >> participation to make these builders useful. If no one wants to make these >> builders better, or cares about them, it is reasonable to disable them. It >> is equivalent to code/feature/port deprecation, if nobody maintains the >> code/feature/port, we'll deprecate it. >> >>> This is fundamentally inconsistent. Actions speak louder than words >>> and this demonstrates the priorities of the GDB community. >> >> I don't see the inconsistency here. We need more participation or contribution >> to make these builders more useful, it is simple, isn't? > > The buildbots are the responsibility of both the organization > providing the servers and the community. No one from the community > noticed anything wrong with the s390x debian buildbot for months. And > no one said: "Hey, it looks like something is wrong with this > buildbot, can the s390x community take a look?" The message was: "The > warning messages from the buildbot are annoying, so we're disabling > them." David, I contacted you back in private in October and let you know that your buildslave was having issues. The same way, by the way, that I also contacted Edjunior about problems I was seeing with the PPC64 machines. You replied to me with the same line you used here: "The machine is fine, has lots of resources, there's nothing wrong". Unfortunately I could not dedicate more time to the issue I was seeing, but as Yao said, s390x is not my priority and I thought it would be better to ask someone else to have a look. I assume you have more contact with the s390x community than I do, but I don't know if you relayed my message to them as well. I will repeat: I did not disable the email notifications "because they are annoying". I disabled them because the Debian s390x, under your supervision, have a backlog of more than 900 builds. It is counterproductive to let the notifications enabled in this case, because (a) there is something clearly wrong happening, and (b) when a developer asks for a Try Build, he/she expects the results e-mail to arrive in a timely manner. Anyway, I can't believe I'm having to explain these things again here. So this will be my last post on this subject. -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/