On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Seth Shelnutt <shelnutt2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It's harder than it sounds to actually get
>> a few useful app tests written. Plus there'll
>> be some work writing up and fixing the bugs
>> it uncovers.
>

> So then do you think it's a worthy proposal to just work on wpkg scripts? I
> have no problem working on this, and writting up/trying to fix bugs that are
> uncovered. I just didn't think that by itself it would be good enough to be
> accepted as a GSoC project.

I think it's enough, especially if you do one or two ahead of time and
demonstrate that the process actually works. It helps to have a wine
patch under your belt, too.

>> Arjun Comar is going to propose something similar, but using Buildbot
>> as the point of integration.
>

> I look forward to seeing his proposal. Will he be bring patchwatcher back to
> life, but in buildbot form?

I think he's starting with just getting a buildbot working, then adding
a trybot with a manual upload. Patchwatcher integration would be a plus,
but its mailing list watcher is fragile and needs rewriting.
(Maybe you could do that little bit.)

Arjun, are you ready to post a proposal?
- Dan