continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Trygve Laugstøl <>
Subject Re: Trusting in our own dog food
Date Mon, 15 Jan 2007 12:02:45 GMT
Brett Porter wrote:
> so... you're saying you don't trust our dog food? :)

No, I'm saying it's there to verify the dog food. If there is no 
discrepancies between what the cron is saying and the C instance is 
saying, it's good. If there is an discrepancy it's not good.

It will be more a tool to verification tool that a CI (but that might be 
two sides of the same story :)


> The only thing it tests differently is:
> - works by cron, whereas continuum might go down/hang/something else 
> (which is something we should work on fixing if it does, rather than 
> rely on
> - runs a reactor (can add that as a less frequent build execution in 
> continuum too, though).
> So, I don't see any reason to keep it - wdyt?
> - Brett
> On 11/01/2007, at 7:57 PM, Trygve Laugstøl wrote:
>> Brett Porter wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>> I'd like to turn off and instead only use Continuum 
>>> itself to do CI for Continuum. Any objections?
>> I don't see why it should be turned off, but perhaps the automatic 
>> notifications can be turned off or just send failures. That way it 
>> would verify the product (it will in itself be an integration test) 
>> because if the Continuum instance says that something is failing, you 
>> should expect an email saying the same right after. Or at least you 
>> can check the logs directory if you're suspecting some other failure.
>> -- 
>> Trygve

View raw message