On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 16:58:26 +0000 Markos Chandras <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 12/03/2016 05:31 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 13:13:36 +0000 > > Markos Chandras <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > >> On 12/03/2016 10:41 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > >>> On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 10:35:32 +0100 > >>> Patrice Clement <monsie...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Friday 02 Dec 2016 14:10:27, Michał Górny wrote : > >>>>> Hi, everyone. > >>>>> > >>>>> I've heard multiple times about various tinderbox projects being > >>>>> started by individuals in Gentoo. In fact, so many different projects > >>>>> that I've forgotten who was working on most of them. > >>>>> > >>>>> I know that Toralf is doing tinderboxing for most of the stuff. > >>>>> What other projects do we have there? What is their status? > >>>>> > >>>>> Is there anything we could try to integrate with pull requests to get > >>>>> a better testing? > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Michał Górny > >>>>> <http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> > >>>> > >>>> Continuous integration is all the rage these days and tinderboxing is the > >>>> obvious way to go concerning Gentoo. AFAIK, Toralf is the only > >>>> contributor > >>>> doing tinderboxing out of his own will. In reality, we should have a > >>>> team of > >>>> devs looking after our own tinderboxes instead of relying on the > >>>> community. > >>>> > >>>> I'm wondering if we could start a donation campain for this project and > >>>> ask > >>>> people if they've got spare machines laying around. I know a lot of > >>>> folks are > >>>> reading this mailing list so maybe asking on gentoo-dev first for a > >>>> start would > >>>> be appropriate. > >>> > >>> Hardware is not the problem. Lack of software is. > >>> > >> > >> Have you considered using openQA[1] like openSUSE[2] and Fedora[3] do > >> instead of reinventing the wheel? > >> > >> [1] http://open.qa/ > >> [2] https://openqa.opensuse.org/ > >> [3] https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/ > > > > Do you by any chance happen to know how it maps to our needs? > > At a first glance it seems quite tangential. > > > > Depends on what you want to test. I guess openQA would be a very good > solution if you want to test a snapshot of the tree against the most > common scenarios for example > > - todays snapshot with plasma5 > - todays snapshot with gnome3 > - todays snapsnot with lxqt > - ... > - todays snapshot with a few tests against popular console packages > * can gcc build small C test files? > * does bash work? > * does coreutils popular tools work as expected? > > > Having such scenarios in place is probably a more realistic testing > approach than simply build everything with random USE flags just for the > sake of build coverage. I'm looking for something I could tell 'build this package on this commit (pull request)', optionally with some USE flags adjustment. And I'd like it to be fast, i.e. don't bother rebuilding whole KDE libraries every time a pull request requiring them is updated. -- Best regards, Michał Górny <http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>
pgpjTqFyGAcH4.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
