From: Paul Millar paulm@astro.gla.ac.uk One way this could work is if the general format for the BUILD_ID is YYYYMMDDhhmm [ "-" <tag> [ "-" <tag> ] ...] where <tag> is any metadata keyword that must not include a "-"
Right, I have reached the exact same conclusion over lunch myself. So here is a fresh round of specifications:
BUILDING (Paul & Kevin) ----------------------- A.The build process will produce 2 files: <name> <name>.sig where: <name>: the file being published <name>.sig: the GPG signature
B. Naming <program>-<build>-<publisher>-<tools>[-<misc>].<ext> where: <program>: program name (i.e. "winetest", "winrash") <build>: build ID (for winetest, it's YYYYMMDDhhmm) <publisher>: publisher ID (i.e. "paul", "kevin") <tools>: tool chain used (i.e. "mingw", "msvc") <mic>: any other information the publisher wishes this can be used to support different builds for the same <build>, say with different flags, patches, etc. <ext>: appropriate extension (i.e. "zip", "exe")
C. Publishing After the files have been successfully uploaded to the server (for winetest, this will be sf.net), a publish event will be sent to WineHQ, with the following form:
http://test.winehq.org/service?publish=true&url=<url> where: <url>: is the URL to the <name>
D. Winetest specific information - <program> = "winetest" - <publisher> = "paul" or "kevin" - <tools> = "mingw" (but a msvc would be good too) - <ext> = "zip" - nightly build will use sources as of 5AM EST - the <build> will use same time converted to UTC so it will mosty be YYYYMMDD1000, but it may be different when daylight-savings is in effect - you should use cvs co -D "YYYY-MM-DD 5:00 EST" to check out the code, and use date -u +%Y%m%d%H%D -d "YYYY-MM-DD 5:00 EST" to generate the <build> (I may have the format wrong, I don't have a reference handy) - the .zip file contains two files: winetest.exe: the object of this exercise winetest.info: metadata information about the build, as the tools that where used, special flags, mentions any special patches, etc. The information in here will not be automatically parsed, but rather is intended to help the developers debug problems. NOTE: should we include all the metadata present in <name> is the names of the .exe and .info? I would personally like to, in order to avoid any possible confusion on the tester's box.
OK, did I miss anything? I will shotly send emails describing the other stages, I did not include them here, since this email is getting a bit long. The good thing is that there are no changes to Chris' winrash, there are a few changes (trivial) to winetest.exe, and dissect&gather, and some to service.cgi. But I'll cover those in my next emails.
As it was written in the Book of "Dimitrie O. Paun" dpaun@rogers.com:
B. Naming <program>-<build>-<publisher>-<tools>[-<misc>].<ext>
Good.
C. Publishing After the files have been successfully uploaded to the server (for winetest, this will be sf.net), a publish event will be sent to WineHQ, with the following form:
http://test.winehq.org/service?publish=true&url=<url> where: <url>: is the URL to the <name>
Only one suggestion. Let's stick with publish=winetest rather than introduce a new parameter of "program". I mean, is publish=false even an option? Basically it would be a throw away value. This greatly simplifies some things that need to be done.
Everything else is ok. Someone get laxdragon to start moving all the files on WineHQ..
-Brian
- the <build> will use same time converted to UTC so it will mosty be YYYYMMDD1000, but it may be different when daylight-savings is in effect
If we are always explicitly using EST, daylight savings will never affect it (its always UTC-5) as when in daylight savings, the timezone changes to EDT (which is UTC-4)
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Kevin Koltzau wrote:
If we are always explicitly using EST, daylight savings will never affect it (its always UTC-5) as when in daylight savings, the timezone changes to EDT (which is UTC-4)
Please, could we all agree to use UTC? It is *the* universal timezone. Expressing time in any other tz always introduces the possibility of confusion.
---- Paul Millar
On April 23, 2004 7:52 am, Paul Millar wrote:
Please, could we all agree to use UTC? It is *the* universal timezone. Expressing time in any other tz always introduces the possibility of confusion.
Paul, sorry but there's no confusion. Let's not go back on that, *that* would cause confusion. If we follow the scheme that I have laid out, there is no problem, so let's stick to it.