Re: Minutes x2 for release team 2002-10-30 and 2002-11-06

On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 00:54, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> Answering a few replies at once, since this thread has wandered all over
> the place.
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 01:38:52PM +0000, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 12:49, Kjartan Maraas wrote:
> > > tir, 2002-11-12 kl. 11:37 skrev Michael Meeks:
> [...]
> > > > 	I think it's quite vital that we get developer consensus on at least
> > > > one new sheriff. There was reluctance in eg. gtk+ to entertain the idea
> > > > that even Jacob could commit build related fixes - we really need to try
> > > > and attract some people that have the time, the interest, are doing loop
> > > > builds and people respect enough[1] to allow them to poke their
> > > > autotools.
> You are expanding the issue here. We need a build sheriff or two or
> three just like we had for GNOME 2.0, since build do break, particularly
> in the lead up to releases as mistakes get made under pressure and
> tiredness. If all modules participate in this or not is really another
> question. I agree, Michael, that it would be nice to have everybody
> giving the same permissions, but if that doesn't happen, then so be it.
> Not having any sheriff at all would then be cutting off our noses to
> spite our face.
> > Who actually follows CVS HEAD for all the modules ? Somebody with a
> > Tinderbox access would be good. (Ximian ok with letting someone with
> > some access to theirs ?)
> The second question is really besides the point. You need people who
> have the ability (and do) build regularly from the appropriate CVS
> modules and branches a lot. During the lead up to the 2.0.0 there were
> multiple people like that. Further, as Michael points out, you need
> people who can understand the autotools stuff (mostly) and read the code
> to work out what caused the breakage and revert the minimal amount
> necessary to fix it.
> Looking at the Tinderbox results is one way to assure a build. Other
> ways are building it yourself regularly and responding quickly when
> people mention on IRC or in email that things aren't building -- then
> the sheriff needs to go in, work out if it's a real build problem (which
> about half of the ones I saw were not -- they were caused by problems on
> people's system) and then fix it, if necessary. Surely the goal is
> simply to keep the tree buildable during a time-sensitive phase of
> development. How that is achieved is irrelevant.

Besides the point ? I don't think so. Many of the people that could be
in such a position (Build Sherriff) are hobbyist that probably don't
have time to rebuild GNOME 24 hours a day. A Tinderbox is an essential
tool for the job. IRC connection is needed, but it's not the sole way to
get information.


/Bastien Nocera

Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but
there is no longer anything to take away.
						Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]