On Friday 2014-04-04 12:49 -0700, jmaher wrote:
> > If this plan is applied to existing tests, then it will lead to
> > style system mochitests being turned off due to other regressions
> > because I'm the person who wrote them and the module owner, and I
> > don't always have time to deal with reg
On 4/4/14, 2:21 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
On 2014-04-04, at 14:02, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
That's not true, we were in that state once, before I stopped working on this
issue. We can get there again if we wanted to. It's just a lot of hard work
which won't scale if we only have one person doi
On 2014-04-04, at 14:02, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> That's not true, we were in that state once, before I stopped working on this
> issue. We can get there again if we wanted to. It's just a lot of hard work
> which won't scale if we only have one person doing it.
It’s self-correcting too. Turn
On 2014-04-04, 4:58 PM, Jonathan Griffin wrote:
With respect to Autoland, I think we'll need to figure out how to make
it take intermittents into account. I don't think we'll ever be a state
with 0 intermittents.
That's not true, we were in that state once, before I stopped working on
this is
On 2014-04-04, 4:30 PM, Chris Peterson wrote:
On 4/4/14, 1:19 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
The majority of the time identifying the regressing patch is
difficult
Identifying the regressing patch is only difficult because we have so
many intermittently failing tests.
Intermittent oranges are one of
With respect to Autoland, I think we'll need to figure out how to make
it take intermittents into account. I don't think we'll ever be a state
with 0 intermittents.
Jonathan
On 4/4/2014 1:30 PM, Chris Peterson wrote:
On 4/4/14, 1:19 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
The majority of the time identifyin
On 4/4/14, 1:19 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
The majority of the time identifying the regressing patch is
difficult
Identifying the regressing patch is only difficult because we have so
many intermittently failing tests.
Intermittent oranges are one of the major blockers for Autoland. If TBPL
nev
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:12 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
>> Escalation path:
>> 1) Ensure we have a bug on file, with the test author, reviewer, module
>> owner, and any other interested parties, links to logs, etc.
>> 2) We need to needinfo? and expect a response within 2 business days, this
>> s
>
> > 4) In the case we go another 2 days with no response from a module owner,
> > we will disable the test.
>
>
>
> Are you talking about newly-added tests, or tests that have been
>
> passing for a long time and recently started failing?
>
>
>
> In the latter case, the burden should fal
On 2014-04-04, 3:12 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
On Friday 2014-04-04 11:58 -0700, jmaher wrote:
As the sheriff's know it is frustrating to deal with hundreds of tests that
fail on a daily basis, but are intermittent.
When a single test case is identified to be leaking or failing at least 10% of
On Friday 2014-04-04 11:58 -0700, jmaher wrote:
> As the sheriff's know it is frustrating to deal with hundreds of tests that
> fail on a daily basis, but are intermittent.
>
> When a single test case is identified to be leaking or failing at least 10%
> of the time, it is time to escalate.
>
>
As the sheriff's know it is frustrating to deal with hundreds of tests that
fail on a daily basis, but are intermittent.
When a single test case is identified to be leaking or failing at least 10% of
the time, it is time to escalate.
Escalation path:
1) Ensure we have a bug on file, with the te
Hi Ehsan,
You might be interested in Bug 992323, where we're planning to move the rest of
the useful bits of 'make check' (that aren't build system tests) elsewhere.
Thanks,
Dan
- Original Message -
From: "Ehsan Akhgari"
To: "Daniel Minor" , dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
Sent: Friday,
Thanks to contributor Jamon Camisso, multi-line highlighting has just landed in
DXR. Now you can do things like this...
http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/CLOBBER#10-15,18-22,4-5
...by pressing buttons like this:
http://dxr.readthedocs.org/en/latest/code-highlighter.html
Enj
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 04/02/2014 07:37 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Zack Weinberg
> wrote:
>> The downside of turning this on would be that any switch
>> statements that *deliberately* include only a subset of the
>> enumerators, plus a de
On 03/04/2014 15:44, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote:> After a long delay and
lots of hard work by 7 different contributors, I am pleased to announce
the final release of MozillaBuild 1.9.0.
Awesome, good job! I was using the pre-release from quite some time on
win8.1 and VS2013, thanks for making it
On 2014-04-04, 6:39 AM, Daniel Minor wrote:
Hello,
Just a heads up that very soon we'll be removing jit-tests from the "make check" target[1]. The
tests have been split out into a separate test job on TBPL[2] (labelled Jit), have been running on Cedar for
several months, and have been recently
Hi Nicolas,
This change only affects running the jit-test test suite as part of "make
check". This doesn't affect building or running the JS shell.
The mach command that has been added replicates how this particular test suite
was previously run in "make check". It could be expanded, of course.
On 04/04/2014 03:39 AM, Daniel Minor wrote:
Just a heads up that very soon we'll be removing jit-tests from the "make check" target[1]. The
tests have been split out into a separate test job on TBPL[2] (labelled Jit), have been running on Cedar for
several months, and have been recently turned
Hello,
Just a heads up that very soon we'll be removing jit-tests from the "make
check" target[1]. The tests have been split out into a separate test job on
TBPL[2] (labelled Jit), have been running on Cedar for several months, and have
been recently turned on for other trees. We've added a mac
20 matches
Mail list logo
