[Bf-committers] Revising the testbuild branch

Bastien Montagne montagne29 at wanadoo.fr
Fri Nov 14 10:12:16 CET 2014


Also, maybe we should add in git tips 
(http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Tools/Git) a line about `git 
fetch -p`, which allows to remove locally branches that where deleted on 
the server?

Le 14/11/2014 10:04, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :
> 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
>>
>
>



More information about the Bf-committers mailing list