harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregory Shimansky <gshiman...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [build-test] thoughts on other formats
Date Thu, 28 Dec 2006 16:09:38 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On Dec 28, 2006, at 12:54 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> I've been thinking a little bit about our alert messages, and
>> 1) I think that each system that's submitting should have an assigned 
>> ID, so it's easy to figure out who is what.  It can be as easy as 
>> self-assignment on the wiki registration page.  Just take the next 
>> integer.  I put these up on the system list on the wiki.
>> 2) I'd like to have a "sequence number" for each message, and then a 
>> reference sequence number for "BUILD FIXED" messages, to make it 
>> easier to figure out which break was fixed (for CC systems that are 
>> running multiple things).  This may be a pita, though, as it's 
>> stateful.  But it's already stateful, I guess.
>> 3) How about basic machine-readable formatting?  Maybe something like 
>> the message body be a combination of a meta data header and then the 
>> current blob of stuff we currently have.
>> So :
>> <info>
>>     <systemid>1</systemid>
>>     <status>FIXED</status>
>>     <sequence>102031</sequence>
>>     <reference>102030</sequence>
> actually, we should put everything in there - platform, OS, tool info, 
> etc....


I support the idea of identifying alert messages and pair them in 
broken-fixed pairs. This would make the understanding of the current 
state by platform much more convenient.


View raw message