Re: GNOME Continuous and build breakage

Hi all;

Yeah, the ping was pretty much implied - but it's harder to cope with
because I can only ping the people I know on IRC. We don't have a
strict rule matching IRC nicknames to maintainers or even projects,
and I cannot join every single IRC chat room on

I think the ping is a "best effort"; if I can't manage to do that in
30 seconds then I'll just revert and file a bug instead.

I want to send this to desktop-devel-list and try and recruit more
people to be build sheriffs. What do you think?


On 18 December 2015 at 15:04, Javier Jardón <jjardon gnome org> wrote:
On 16 December 2015 at 18:29, Matthias Clasen <matthias clasen gmail com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com> wrote:
Hi all;

I've been meaning to discuss this with the release team for a while,
and I probably already annoyed a bunch of people on IRC, so here goes.

I'd like the r-t to give its blessing to volunteers that decide to act
as "build sheriffs" on Continuous builds. If we exclude the issues
with the build machine itself throwing a fit — something that usually
gets fixed by Colin kicking it — the vast majority of build breakages
come from GNOME projects issues.

What usually happens when a build goes into perma-red (i.e. it keeps
failing over the same component) is that somebody on the #testable IRC
channel (usually me or Colin Walters) tags the module inside the
Continous manifest, opens a bug, and hopes that a fix get applied and
communicated on the channel so that the tag gets reverted.

This is not enough, and it does not raise the bar in keeping
Continuous (and thus GNOME) building. It actually lowers it a fair
bit, to the effective point that *nobody* cares about Continuous

I want this to change. I want to be able to revert failing commits on
the offending modules, if they are hosted on GNOME infrastructure, if
they fail for more than N hours, and *then* open a bug about it.
Ideally, I want to tag only modules that are *not* hosted on GNOME
infrastructure, as they are beyond our control and commit
capabilities. In short, I want to ensure that GNOME maintainers become
a bit more proactive in giving a crap about their modules breaking on
something that is not their own computers.

This obviously will need to be discussed on d-d-l, but I'd like to get
some feedback from a limited audience, and hopefully have the release
team backing this initiative — especially in the hope that we can have
more than one build sheriff, to cover more time zones, and avoid
perma-red build failures going on for more than two or three hours,
instead of half a day.

This sounds ok to me - I think a policy of pinging the relevant
maintainer on irc first before reverting is a good idea (I know I
break things occasionally, and would appreciate a ping if I don't see
the breakage myself). I'd be happy to help out with this as well

Sorry for the late response.

I'd like to add if ping is not possible, it would be ok to me to
revert the offending commit and send an email to the maintainer of the
module explaining why (and probably to the author of the commit as

Javier Jardón

[ ] ebassi [ gmail com]

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