www-infrastructure-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <ste...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [scm] Use case: Continuous integration
Date Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:34:33 GMT
sebb wrote:
> On 01/03/2008, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>>  >  If there are 10 commits in as many minutes, does the CI system really
>>  >  need to build each one?
>>
>>
>> It wuold IMHO be very useful to have clear indication of which one of
>>  those 10 commits actually broke the build.
> 
> Not entirely sure why one should care about temporary build failures,
> unless one is trying to find out which committers are not adhering to
> the rules.

What you could do is intermittent builds, but when it fails, do a binary 
search on all changes since then to work out which commit broke it.


I'm also exploring some ideas of raising the notion of building to a new 
level, as sketched out in "The Future of Build Tools"

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dtrrw53_3wqsb9s

Imagine every developer having a CI tool running against their local 
code (or private branch) all the time. You save something, and after a 
bit of idleness the build and tests run. If you are writing dynamic web 
sites, the tests could run all the time, you'd just hit reload on the 
results page (or the reload could trigger the rebuild).

Works best with scripted languages, where there is no compile process, 
just testing. I'm targeting erlang first of all, as I'm pretty 
unimpressed with the current erlang build process.


-- 
Steve Loughran                  http://www.1060.org/blogxter/publish/5
Author: Ant in Action           http://antbook.org/

Mime
View raw message