continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>
Subject Re: refactoring the SCM
Date Thu, 08 May 2008 03:15:43 GMT

On 08/05/2008, at 12:58 PM, Marica Tan wrote:

>>
>> sounds good - how do you think we should represent the other types of
>> errors when SVN is offline, or an update can't be initiated because  
>> the POM
>> is bad, etc?
>>
>>
> I think if it's a failure related to the source, like POMs etc...  
> then it
> should be represented by an "X" mark. But if it's related to scm
> connections, hard drive failures, or anything related to  
> infrastructure..
> then either it will be represented by it's last build whether it's  
> an "X" or
> check mark or we could create another symbol for that?

I'm undecided on two fronts :)

- I think I can go either way on treating POM errors as transient (I  
couldn't even attempt to build) or failures (I tried to build and  
couldn't). It's more naturally the latter due to the location in  
source control, but it is just a step of build configuration, which  
can fail in other ways (or for ant, etc projects that don't auto  
update) and is "transient" there.

- should we replace the icon in the UI for the status, or have an  
additional one that indicates the last build couldn't run? I'm leaning  
towards the latter. The key difference I see is that we don't record a  
build result for transient errors - it's just a displayed state (and  
associated error message) that goes away later.

WDYT?

- Brett

--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/


Mime
View raw message