Re: Continuous Builds in GNOME

Hi Emanuelle,

I just wanted to pitch into this discussion and say thanks to you (and everyone else working on this) for putting all the effort into fixing build issues and improving continuous integration.

I have been a developer for different gnome components for a while, but I am not such a frequent contributor that I know all the internals of most core components. So when a module breaks during a jhbuild, then I am often quite lost and need a few hours of google, asking people at #gtk or #gnome as well as trial and error.

Most of the time I just want to "quickly get a fairly recent build" and then "write a small patch" to fix something in one of the gnome modules. When that happens I may be able to set aside a few hours or half a day but not a whole week. However most times this half day is wasted battling with jhbuild and trying to get a working environment that not only builds glib but which actually comes as far as to build the module for which I wanted to write a patch in the first place. When I have already spend 4 hours and jhbuild is just building module 20 out of 90, and breaking on some unresolvable dependency, missing library, some obscure configure or make error or what ever, then this is usually the point were I just go and do something else.

So again, all your effort its highly appreciated.

I really hope that at some point in the future its possible to just type `jhbuild build` then go away to work on something else when then come back to find the build finished and login to the ready jhbuild session. If on top of that this would work not only on the most recent fedora "from last week" or so, but on the most recent Ubuntu _LTS_ or Debian _stable_, then that would be really awesome. And it would mean that I could spend more time testing gnome modules, fixing bugs and help to improve gnome rather then spending days trying to get all modules building.

Thanks and Cheers

On 03/06/16 10:42, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
Still, people consider Continuous somebody else's problem; if it
"breaks on Continuous" but not on a maintainer machine, then who

Even if we magically got the resources (build machines, at least one
person working on the infrastructure side, volunteer work to improve
the tooling), the attitude of "my module is my fiefdom, if a build
breaks*you*  fix it" has to change.

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