ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Alexander Sack <asac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Robert Park <robert.park@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Alexander Sack <asac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Oliver Grawert <ogra@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> why would it matter at all if an image gets promoted ... in my ideal
>>> world we would have builds triggered every time a change set enters from
>>> proposed or at least every 2h ... only a minimal amount of these images
>>> would be promoted at all, but we had a lot to pick the best one from ;)
>>
>> The reason for that is in a CI world we feed that image back so new
>> merge proposals get tested on top of the most recent known good state.
>> And this need to happen frequently, so folks don't test on outdated
>> stuff etc.
>>
>> And yes, we currently don't have enough automation to be sure it's
>> dogfood quality. But fixing that should be done through investing in
>> more automation rather than changing the approach to put high latency
>> manual and avengers activities into the middle of our rapid CI loop.
>
> This is a really impressive level of double-speak, and I think it
> needs to be called out.
>
> Oliver is proposing a simple cron job that will increase the amount of
> automation in the system, and reduce the amount of manual intervention
> that is required for image builds. What you are proposing is a manual
> system that requires a great degree of wasteful babysitting.
>
> It seems that we all agree that the ideal scenario is trigger-based
> image builds (ie, build a new image any time anything lands in the
> archive). But until that system is in place, a high-frequency cron job
> is undeniably closer to the ideal than the current system of needless
> busywork heaped upon already-busy people.

Please always remember that we talk about running ONE or maybe TWO
COMMANDS hooked up to a process that we do anyway. How can you guys
use words like "busywork heaped upon someone" or "great degree of
watseful babysitting" for that ... seriously :).


>
> And I have yet to hear any compelling arguments against cron. Please
> stop suggesting that it is bad just because it is old. The linux
> kernel is 23 years old, should we stop using that, too? cron is a tool
> that exists, it is easily at our disposal, and has a proven track
> record of reliability. Please, let's use it!

Yeah, thats not the reason as you might guess. I repeated my real
reasons a few times. Please read them up and lets talk about those.

I think Sergio is on right track :)