incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Should we start posting regular dev snapshot builds for 3.4.1 or 3.5?
Date Fri, 15 Jun 2012 06:05:00 GMT
On 6/14/12 11:33 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/14/2012 8:20 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> On 6/14/12 5:04 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:53:51AM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> I've seeing a lot of bug fixes coming in.  This is great!
>>>>
>>>> But none of us are perfect.  Sometimes bug fixes don't work or fixing
>>>> one bug causes another problem.    That is why we test.   And it is
>>>> best to test a bug fix before too much time has elapsed.
>>>>
>>>> Would it make sense to agree on a date to post an updated dev
>>>> snapshot, so we can verify the bug fixes and ensure that no new
>>>> instability has been introduced?  Maybe get into the practice of doing
>>>> this regularly, e.g., every 1 or 2 weeks or something.
>>> IMO first we should decide if building 3.4.1 alphas/betas or 3.5
>>> Developer
>>> Snapshots; yes, the naming is a mess, we should clear this up, also
>>> clear the page
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots
>>>
>>> IIRC in OOo times, Developer Snapshots where builds from the main code
>>> line, for example http://hg.services.openoffice.org/DEV300/
>>> Betas where from the release code line, for example
>>> http://hg.services.openoffice.org/OOO340/
>>> http://hg.services.openoffice.org/OOO330/
>>> http://hg.services.openoffice.org/OOO320/
>>>
>>> I guess we could build both, at different intervals, a 3.5 Dev.Snap. per
>>> month and a 3.4.1 beta every week or two, for example.
>>>
>> When you see my proposed schedule for 3.4.1 I have proposed to start dev
>> builds for 3.4.1 with the beginning of June. We are working on setting
>> up some local machines that allow us to automate this a little bit. I
>> hope we can start at least next week with this.
>>
>> And I agree to Ariel that it make sense to start with dev builds for 3.5
>> (trunk) as well. And ideally we can use the binaries from the build bots
>> directly. As I learned today we changed the configure flags already and
>> we should check if we can these builds directly. Or if not we should
>> check what we need to fix to make them usable. That would of course make
>> things easier.
> I think the builds from the buildbot could be directly used.  I think
> there are a couple of things that would need to be changed:
>  - create separate builds for 3.4.1 and trunk
>  - create weekly 'dev builds' that will be a bit different than the
> nightlies, with extra steps required and correct configure options.
>  - create specific build for weekly rat + coverity + ??? for code
> analysis that does not need to be run daily (or nightly)
> 
I agree that makes absolutely sense.

What do you think how much effort is it to adapt the existing scripts to
support this? I have still no knowledge about the build bots, their
setup... I should learn more about it ;-)

We have to check how such a setup will work when we know more details
about the code signing for our Windows binaries. That won't be easy from
a security perspective...

Do you know which compiler we use on the builds bots, do we use the
professional version? We should ensure to enable ATL and ActiveX on the
build bots as well.

Juergen

> A.
> 
>>
>> Juergen
>>
> 



Mime
View raw message