[Bf-committers] Revising the testbuild branch

Sergey Sharybin sergey.vfx at gmail.com
Fri Nov 14 10:04:51 CET 2014 

For me it seems this happens because Dalai didn't follow the updates in the
ML and pushed testbuild branch again/ Which for sure created new branch and
pushed all the commits. So in this particular case proper solution would be
if the developers follow the ML, imo.

I can also forbid creating new branches but afraid it'll cause more
troubles. And one more thing to be watched -- do not `git pull --rebase`
after the merge commit.

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

> Don’t think so - and testbuild (now experimental-build) is not the only
> one, this can happen (and already have happened) in any branch if you
> mess a merge or whatever (even happens when backporting fixes into
> release branches…).
> Le 14/11/2014 08:00, Thomas Dinges a écrit :
> > That's not the first time I have these 100+ e-mails from the testbuild
> > branch in my inbox. Can't we do something about this? ...
> >
> > Am 14.11.2014 um 04:47 schrieb Dalai Felinto:
> >> How to make a build now? After I click on 'Force Build' I land in a
> >> page saying: "Authorization Failed. You are not allowed to perform
> >> this action."
> >>
> >> And for the records, in the future it would help to have the outcome
> >> of such an important discussion re-sent to the list as an email on its
> >> own (instead of a reply in a 11-email long thread)  ... I just pushed
> >> 'testbuild' back to the servers :( .... [and deleted it after, but
> >> still, the notification commits will be all over everyone's email
> >> boxes].
> >>
> >> Dalai
> >> --
> >> blendernetwork.org/dalai-felinto
> >> www.dalaifelinto.com
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-10-16 8:16 GMT-03:00 Bastien Montagne <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr>:
> >>> Hi devs,
> >>>
> >>> So, we resurrected testbuild as 'experimental-build', getting rid of
> the
> >>> issues that caused last week's shutdown of this tool (i.e. builds
> >>> publicly available from builder.b.o., and confusing name with
> testbuilds
> >>> done during release process).
> >>>
> >>> Note this tool implies commit access to our main git repository.
> >>>
> >>> Here are the steps to follow to make an experimental build:
> >>> * Checkout the 'experimental-build' branch, merge master in,
> >>> squash-apply your code to it, revert last commit, and push to origin
> >>> (see below[1] for an concrete example);
> >>> * Go to one of the buildbot's builders' page (e.g.
> >>> https://builder.blender.org/builders/linux_glibc211_x86_64_scons) -
> note
> >>> you'll need to do that for all platforms you want to build on.
> >>> * Select 'experimental-build' instead of 'master' in the branch
> >>> dropdown, copy-paste the exact hash of your squashed-commit of your
> >>> patch into 'revision' field, and force the build.
> >>> * Go to the experimental 'hidden' sub-folder of
> >>> https://builder.blender.org/download/ and download your builds from
> >>> there asap.
> >>> * DO NOT SHARE ABOVE LINK PUBLICLY! It's your responsibility to
> >>> distribute your builds (e.g. through graphicall, dropbox, whatever),
> >>> 'official' blender site should not be involved in this. Note that the
> >>> next experimental build on the same builder will replace current one,
> so
> >>> builder.b.o is not a reliable storage for such builds anyway!
> >>>
> >>> Quite obviously, let's try not to abuse the feature! :)
> >>>
> >>> Happy Blending,
> >>> Bastien
> >>>
> >>> [1] Typical git commands to make an experimental build:
> >>>        $ git checkout experimental-build
> >>>        $ git merge origin/master
> >>>        $ git merge --squash mywippatch
> >>>        $ git commit
> >>>        $ git revert HEAD
> >>>        $ git push origin
> >>>        $ git checkout master
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Le 12/10/2014 10:39, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :
> >>>> 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
> >>>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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