[Bf-committers] Revising the testbuild branch

Sergey Sharybin sergey.vfx at gmail.com
Sun Oct 12 10:39:26 CEST 2014 

Think we should agree on some better name then and deploy?

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

> Good catch, this seems to work fine! :)
>
> Le 12/10/2014 08:26, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :
> > Did you try using public_html/testbuilds instead? There's also a code in
> > the template which lusts the dirs, could comment that out.
> > On Oct 11, 2014 11:27 PM, "Bastien Montagne" <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Following Sergey's suggestion (put testbuilds in a separate dir) I
> >> fought a bit with my local version of buildbot to get it running again.
> >>
> >> In the end, looks like a very simple change is enough, in
> >> master_unpack.py, something like:
> >>
> >> diff --git a/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py
> >> b/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py
> >> index ecacf3b..f5c8493 100644
> >> --- a/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py
> >> +++ b/build_files/buildbot/master_unpack.py
> >> @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ if platform == '':
> >>        sys.exit(1)
> >>
> >>    # extract
> >> -directory = 'public_html/download'
> >> +directory = 'public_html/download' if branch == 'master' else
> >> 'public_html/download/testbuilds'
> >>
> >>    try:
> >>        zf = z.open(package)
> >>
> >> public_html/download/testbuilds must be created beforehand of course.
> >>
> >> On my local web buildbot UI, that dir is automatically listed under the
> >> download page… Not sure whether we consider that as safe enough for
> >> users not to mess with it? Guess we can find a way to hide it,
> otherwise.
> >>
> >> As a side note, do not think listing those builds publically is needed
> >> at all, they are replaced by next one so dev has to 'backup' them
> anyway.
> >>
> >> And yes, probably renaming could be nice too… 'experimental' sounds good
> >> to me.
> >>
> >> Bastien
> >>
> >> Le 11/10/2014 20:26, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :
> >>> It _had been_ discussed several times at least. Starting from
> discussion
> >> in
> >>> #lbendercoders between me, Dan, Bastien and even Ton. Then once it was
> >> all
> >>> set up (and i believe some discussion happened in the ML as well). Once
> >> all
> >>> the changes to the infrastructure were done it was announced in the ML:
> >>> http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2014-July/043948.html
> >> In
> >>> such a situation it's real weird to have a post-factum "it should have
> >>> never been done this way".
> >>>
> >>> As an addition to the previous suggestion:
> >>> - We can as well just put a REAL HUGE BANNER on top of the experimental
> >>> builds just to stress once again that they're experimental if it'll be
> >>> considered useful to have those builds listed to public.
> >>> - We can rename "testbuild" to something like  "devbuild" (as
> >>> developer-build) or "experimental" to prevent possible confusion with
> the
> >>> testbuilds being done as a part of the release build.
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Ton Roosendaal <ton at blender.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Bastien,
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry, I've asked around and had the impression Sergey added the
> feature
> >>>> on builder.blender.org.
> >>>>
> >>>> The fact that building branches on buildbot is useful is not disputed.
> >>>> It's just not acceptable to offer an official build for download on a
> >>>> popular page on blender.org, with unknown patches or branches
> applied.
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's just keep the lines short and discuss decisions like this
> together
> >>>> well?
> >>>>
> >>>> Laters,
> >>>>
> >>>> -Ton-
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Ton Roosendaal  -  ton at blender.org   -   www.blender.org
> >>>> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
> >>>> Entrepotdok 57A  -  1018AD Amsterdam  -  The Netherlands
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11 Oct, 2014, at 18:24, Bastien Montagne wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I’m not happy at all with both the decision and the way it was taken.
> >>>>> Fyi, I was the one who spent a fair amount of time some months agon
> >>>>> setting this up, and I think it has proven to be really really useful
> >>>>> for all wip projects around.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Further more, I do not see any reason to just cut this out out of the
> >>>>> blue, there was no urgency at all here. And I do not even really
> >>>>> understand the root of the issue, imho people who are not able to
> make
> >> a
> >>>>> distinction between builds tagged as 'official' and builds tagged as
> >>>>> 'testbuild' have nothing to do on builder.b.o.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But even though, imho it would have been much nicer to ask to add
> some
> >>>>> way to delete testbuilds from the server, again see no urgency at all
> >>>>> here that could justify this discontinuation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Adding back build of all branches will just create much much more
> mess,
> >>>>> we won’t gain anything. Oh, and people that cannot understand what
> >>>>> 'testbuild' means won’t be able either to distinguish from master and
> >>>>> branches builds - even less I’d say.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Very disapointed here!
> >>>>> Bastien
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Le 11/10/2014 15:59, Ton Roosendaal a écrit :
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I've asked Sergey to disable the testbuild branch from automatic
> >>>> building.
> >>>>>> This is currently leading to a confusing situation. People have no
> >> idea
> >>>> what's the code that is in it. It's even being used to apply patches
> >> from
> >>>> the tracker on it. This information is invisible for our website
> >> visitors.
> >>>>>> Worse is that visitors think it's the official release test build,
> and
> >>>> not a testing branch for coders only.
> >>>>>> We should do this better communicated. Can we just back to the old
> >>>> option that you can build branches?
> >>>>>> This way that branch build gets properly named and timestamped.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The only problem is that too many builds might flood the bot's list
> of
> >>>> builds. It shouldn't be too hard to make a delete button on that page
> >> for
> >>>> old ones (for admins)?
> >>>>>> Laters,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Ton-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> Ton Roosendaal  -  ton at blender.org   -   www.blender.org
> >>>>>> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
> >>>>>> Entrepotdok 57A  -  1018AD Amsterdam  -  The Netherlands
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
> >>>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >>>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
> >>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Bf-committers mailing list
> >>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-committers mailing list
> >> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>



-- 
With best regards, Sergey Sharybin

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list