Mats Lidell writes:
Our current situation is that nearly all builds create warnings so
fail+warning would not be an option right now (if we are not pushing
hard for fixing the warnings?)
We do push hard for fixing warnings, but we've done that for decades
now. We don't need the buildbot to annoy us into doing the right
thing now. We do need the buildbot so that people can see breakage on
platforms they can't build on.
Also, there are a number of warnings we can't easily fix AFAIK (eg,
warnings about non-prototyped functions in lib-src, and certain
warnings on Mac).
So I suggest giving the option to send mail for builds that fail a
try. That would under current situation create one mail for the
failing windows build. It will create 28 mails the day there is
something really bad. But then it would get some focus.
That's a bit much, even for something that breaks all the builds. :-)
Does the buildbot mail contain a commit ID (anything that
distinguishes one series of builds from another)? I could add a
filter to Mailman to only let the first one through very easily, and
it might not be massively difficult to set up a system that lets the
first mail from a commit go through, and digests the rest, or even
lets only the first fail message through, and bundles all successes
into one and any other failures into one.
It would probably also be possible to borrow some code from Mailman to
do those things at buildbot.
XEmacs-Beta mailing list