Hi, On 10/26/2012 01:20 PM, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > > The nice thing about bots is they don't completely block integration. It's an > adjunct: if it decides not to work one day, it's not such a crisis. So maybe > we could use more of those and less of the kind of CI testing that does block > it, > to avoid the kind of "log jams" we've seen lately. We can separate tests into > sets which take longer to run and are warning-only (and can be done ahead of > time > on a "bot" machine), and tests which are required to pass before each > integration. > The UI needs to be able to handle any number of columns of results that come > back > from them. Currently only the doc bot is able to really -1 a change, so that > it > requires a manual override to submit. But the other bots should be able to > do the > same. I heard there's something hard about making that happen though. >
There is a proposal to add a third (non-blocking) category for all the other bots (doc bot, license bot, check header guards, etc) https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTQAINFRA-567 Cheers, -- Sergio Ahumada Quality Engineer - Digia, Qt _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
