[Bf-committers] Revising the testbuild branch

Sun Oct 12 08:26:02 CEST 2014

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
>