Am Montag, 12. Juni 2006 20:22 schrieb Paul Vriens:
Hi,
in the last months we've experienced several times that there was no
winetest.exe available at the usual location
(http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/paulm/WRT/CrossBuilt/) for several
days/weeks. The reasons are sometimes known but in any case it's a Single Point Of Failure.
What will it take to have multiple sites generating and hosting the
winetest executable? Or do we already have this?
Cheers,
Paul.
Hi,
not the answer to your question, but some thoughts about the topic.
As long as the automatic build of Paul Millar works, there is not reason to have a second winetest binary for nearly the same git/cvs source of the
tests. One binary a day is enough. If you check
http://test.winehq.org/data/ you will see that we miss often tests results for some windows platforms.
If building the winetest binary fails. Someone needs to look into the
reason
anyway. In almost all cases its a missing import in a library the test
ist linked against. So first "our mingw environment" needs to be fixed. Just running another automatic build will fail with the same error as the build of
Paul.
Its not hard for me to do the manual build. I just need some webspace to
put
the stuff on. And i need to know what needs to be modified in the source
before the build (somehow the build date need to be patched into the source).
Also the question is how the new build is announce to the public (hope that it si not the case that it appears on astro.gla.ac.uk).
Bye Stefan
Hi,
exactly my point. I know Paul Millar fixes stuff all the time by patches of you I think and Hans Leidekker (and others). But he is only one person, with of course a limited amount of time.
Maybe we should have a few sites generating the winebuild and using a different path to publish stuff at test.winehq.org/data/[site]. We don't want to mix the output of different executables in one view (apples and pears).
Another thing what we could is just use a well-known-url for the winetest.exe like we did with the Mozilla ActiveX component. This url should of course point to the latest available on all site (don't know if that's feasible).
Cheers,
Paul.
Paul Vriens wrote:
Am Montag, 12. Juni 2006 20:22 schrieb Paul Vriens:
Hi,
in the last months we've experienced several times that there was no
winetest.exe available at the usual location
(http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/paulm/WRT/CrossBuilt/) for several
days/weeks. The reasons are sometimes known but in any case it's a Single Point Of Failure.
What will it take to have multiple sites generating and hosting the
winetest executable? Or do we already have this?
Cheers,
Paul.
Hi,
not the answer to your question, but some thoughts about the topic.
As long as the automatic build of Paul Millar works, there is not reason to have a second winetest binary for nearly the same git/cvs source of the
tests. One binary a day is enough. If you check
http://test.winehq.org/data/ you will see that we miss often tests results for some windows platforms.
If building the winetest binary fails. Someone needs to look into the
reason
anyway. In almost all cases its a missing import in a library the test
ist linked against. So first "our mingw environment" needs to be fixed. Just running another automatic build will fail with the same error as the build of
Paul.
Its not hard for me to do the manual build. I just need some webspace to
put
the stuff on. And i need to know what needs to be modified in the source
before the build (somehow the build date need to be patched into the source).
Also the question is how the new build is announce to the public (hope that it si not the case that it appears on astro.gla.ac.uk).
exactly my point. I know Paul Millar fixes stuff all the time by patches of you I think and Hans Leidekker (and others). But he is only one person, with of course a limited amount of time.
Maybe we should have a few sites generating the winebuild and using a different path to publish stuff at test.winehq.org/data/[site]. We don't want to mix the output of different executables in one view (apples and pears).
There are a limited number of winetest reports, but it's nice to be able to see how a single test operates on a variety of systems. However, having separate sites would fragment the reports.
How about integrating all of winetest into winehq.org where there is a primary maintainer and one or more backup maintainers?
Andrew
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 06:57 -0600, Andrew Ziem wrote:
Paul Vriens wrote:
Am Montag, 12. Juni 2006 20:22 schrieb Paul Vriens:
Hi,
in the last months we've experienced several times that there was no
winetest.exe available at the usual location
(http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/paulm/WRT/CrossBuilt/) for several
days/weeks. The reasons are sometimes known but in any case it's a Single Point Of Failure.
What will it take to have multiple sites generating and hosting the
winetest executable? Or do we already have this?
Cheers,
Paul.
Hi,
not the answer to your question, but some thoughts about the topic.
As long as the automatic build of Paul Millar works, there is not reason to have a second winetest binary for nearly the same git/cvs source of the
tests. One binary a day is enough. If you check
http://test.winehq.org/data/ you will see that we miss often tests results for some windows platforms.
If building the winetest binary fails. Someone needs to look into the
reason
anyway. In almost all cases its a missing import in a library the test
ist linked against. So first "our mingw environment" needs to be fixed. Just running another automatic build will fail with the same error as the build of
Paul.
Its not hard for me to do the manual build. I just need some webspace to
put
the stuff on. And i need to know what needs to be modified in the source
before the build (somehow the build date need to be patched into the source).
Also the question is how the new build is announce to the public (hope that it si not the case that it appears on astro.gla.ac.uk).
exactly my point. I know Paul Millar fixes stuff all the time by patches of you I think and Hans Leidekker (and others). But he is only one person, with of course a limited amount of time.
Maybe we should have a few sites generating the winebuild and using a different path to publish stuff at test.winehq.org/data/[site]. We don't want to mix the output of different executables in one view (apples and pears).
There are a limited number of winetest reports, but it's nice to be able to see how a single test operates on a variety of systems. However, having separate sites would fragment the reports.
How about integrating all of winetest into winehq.org where there is a primary maintainer and one or more backup maintainers?
Andrew
I wasn't talking about splitting the output. It was more like having a separate branch for every winetest-origin.
Paul