Canary System for trunk
Justin Wood (Callek)
callek at gmail.com
Fri Jun 18 01:48:03 UTC 2010
(Client.py)>>Pull latest comm-central and update to a safe
mozilla-central revision <<
*especially* if we make this default, it will depend on instrumentation
a bit. What happens if --mozilla-repo is not m-c. Do we test for that,
not support it, etc. i.e. local clones, alternate project branches etc.
Then there is the question of what happens if there is a network failure
between client.py and the service that hosts this setup. Do we assume
m-c tip, no update, etc.
Last, do we care about potential extension alternatives
(venkman/chatzilla) etc breakages/revs?
>>When a mozilla-central changeset has all green builds, the changeset
will be counted as "good".<<
Builds, Builds+Tests, Builds+Starred tests, other?
IOW what are we using to determine this "good" state exactly. A green
build but thousands of busted tests is not necessarily good. Talos can
have a MAJOR (>200% regression too) do we count talos in our infra here,
if so "how"?
On 6/17/2010 4:19 AM, Mark Banner wrote:
> Based on the recent discussion
> about a second set of builders / canary system. I've come up with a
> spec of what we want it to do:
> At this stage, I'm just trying to come up with a list of aims/basic
> design features to check that we've got everything that we want from
> it covered. Once we've agreed on that, then we can start thinking
> about the implementation.
> Hence, please provide thoughts/feedback here.
~Justin Wood (Callek)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tb-planning