You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net> on 2010/02/05 10:20:50 UTC
[Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
this is how james deals with nightly builds.
so it is possible with in the apache infra
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 03:34:48 -0500 (EST)
From: JAMES Nightly Build System <no...@devtech.com>
Reply-To: James Developers List <se...@james.apache.org>
To: JAMES Server Development <se...@james.apache.org>
An automated nightly build of JAMES has been posted to
http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Any unit test errors from the build should be reported below:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 4 minutes 38 seconds
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Done. Packages Will Be Uploaded To The Nightly Repository.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please review http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/BUILD.log.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On 5/02/2010, at 2:39 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> Adam Heath wrote:
>> I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
>> buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
>> even being tested.
>>
> I really do agree. It jumped out at me recently that we don't have a
> download link for a "known to be working" build that has been thoroughly
> tested by humans. If someone checks something in to 09.04 that breaks
> behavior but doesn't show up in the test suite then a lot of people may
> get a bad first impression of our software.
Not to mention the tests don't (and have never) run successfully in the release branch. I didn't get them all fixed up until afterwards and the effort to backport vs. reward was too great for me.
> It seems like some Selenium
> tests are the fastest way to get some better guarantees around this.
> Right now I'm just not super confident that the latest release will
> always be working (though it should be).
>
> --
> Ean Schuessler, CTO
> ean@brainfood.com
> 214-720-0700 x 315
> Brainfood, Inc.
> http://www.brainfood.com
>
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Ean Schuessler <ea...@brainfood.com>.
Adam Heath wrote:
> I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
> buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
> even being tested.
>
I really do agree. It jumped out at me recently that we don't have a
download link for a "known to be working" build that has been thoroughly
tested by humans. If someone checks something in to 09.04 that breaks
behavior but doesn't show up in the test suite then a lot of people may
get a bad first impression of our software. It seems like some Selenium
tests are the fastest way to get some better guarantees around this.
Right now I'm just not super confident that the latest release will
always be working (though it should be).
--
Ean Schuessler, CTO
ean@brainfood.com
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@free.fr>.
And recently it has been critiquited by a member of the infra team that we used the word Release for non official Apache release
(Gavin has fixed the wording since then)
It remains that testing thoroughly from the UI a beast like OFBis is not the same than testing most of the other Apache projects
which do not include as much as business level code (if any)
A temporary solution could be to "certified" only the framework, but we have still to do an effort to extract it. Then afterward we
could "certify" component by component...
My 2cts
Jacques
From: "David E Jones" <de...@me.com>
> That is true. The closest thing we've done in the ASF is a test release during incubation, which was one of the requirements to
> "graduate".
>
> Very early in the life of OFBiz there were a few "official" releases, but that practice didn't last long.
>
> -David
>
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 8:22 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>
>> All OFBiz has is nightly builds, we have release branches but we've never done a formal official release.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> On 5/02/2010, at 4:52 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:
>>
>>> nightly builds are not for the consuming public but for testers who's
>>> job it is to bang away on the application and try to break it.
>>> so they just download an run the build. They probably are not even
>>> developers, just testers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ean Schuessler sent the following on 2/5/2010 1:39 PM:
>>>> Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>> I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
>>>>> buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
>>>>> even being tested.
>>>>>
>>>> I really do agree. It jumped out at me recently that we don't have a
>>>> download link for a "known to be working" build that has been thoroughly
>>>> tested by humans. If someone checks something in to 09.04 that breaks
>>>> behavior but doesn't show up in the test suite then a lot of people may
>>>> get a bad first impression of our software. It seems like some Selenium
>>>> tests are the fastest way to get some better guarantees around this.
>>>> Right now I'm just not super confident that the latest release will
>>>> always be working (though it should be).
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
On Feb 8, 2010, at 4:22 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> David E Jones wrote:
>> That is true. The closest thing we've done in the ASF is a test release during incubation, which was one of the requirements to "graduate".
>>
>> Very early in the life of OFBiz there were a few "official" releases, but that practice didn't last long.
>>
> Do we regard the lack of a more vetted build to be a feature?
On Feb 8, 2010, at 4:56 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> David E Jones wrote:
>> Who is "we"?
>>
> The people who care whether the primary download from the site works
> reliably for new users... I suppose.
I added in the rest of the thread, since even I forgot what exactly we were talking about.
We're talking about thoroughly vetted/tested official binary releases, right?
AFAIK the size of "we" in this case is zero people. I guess the evidence of this is that it hasn't been done yet (some of us may care, just not sufficiently).
The process for doing so would be to do something for testing on a release branch, and then vote on a certain release branch revision as being ready for official release, and then we can go through the ASF release and binary distribution process to get it out there.
To get that started we just need someone, or better yet a few people, to start working on the vetting part, probably for the release09.04 branch. Once that group reports that it is ready for prime time, then we can do a vote (giving people enough time to do some of there own testing, etc), and on we go!
-David
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Ean Schuessler <ea...@brainfood.com>.
David E Jones wrote:
> Who is "we"?
>
The people who care whether the primary download from the site works
reliably for new users... I suppose.
--
Ean Schuessler, CTO
ean@brainfood.com
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
On Feb 8, 2010, at 4:22 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> David E Jones wrote:
>> That is true. The closest thing we've done in the ASF is a test release during incubation, which was one of the requirements to "graduate".
>>
>> Very early in the life of OFBiz there were a few "official" releases, but that practice didn't last long.
>>
> Do we regard the lack of a more vetted build to be a feature?
Who is "we"?
-David
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Ean Schuessler <ea...@brainfood.com>.
David E Jones wrote:
> That is true. The closest thing we've done in the ASF is a test release during incubation, which was one of the requirements to "graduate".
>
> Very early in the life of OFBiz there were a few "official" releases, but that practice didn't last long.
>
Do we regard the lack of a more vetted build to be a feature?
--
Ean Schuessler, CTO
ean@brainfood.com
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
That is true. The closest thing we've done in the ASF is a test release during incubation, which was one of the requirements to "graduate".
Very early in the life of OFBiz there were a few "official" releases, but that practice didn't last long.
-David
On Feb 5, 2010, at 8:22 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
> All OFBiz has is nightly builds, we have release branches but we've never done a formal official release.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> On 5/02/2010, at 4:52 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:
>
>> nightly builds are not for the consuming public but for testers who's
>> job it is to bang away on the application and try to break it.
>> so they just download an run the build. They probably are not even
>> developers, just testers
>>
>>
>>
>> Ean Schuessler sent the following on 2/5/2010 1:39 PM:
>>> Adam Heath wrote:
>>>> I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
>>>> buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
>>>> even being tested.
>>>>
>>> I really do agree. It jumped out at me recently that we don't have a
>>> download link for a "known to be working" build that has been thoroughly
>>> tested by humans. If someone checks something in to 09.04 that breaks
>>> behavior but doesn't show up in the test suite then a lot of people may
>>> get a bad first impression of our software. It seems like some Selenium
>>> tests are the fastest way to get some better guarantees around this.
>>> Right now I'm just not super confident that the latest release will
>>> always be working (though it should be).
>>>
>>
>
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
All OFBiz has is nightly builds, we have release branches but we've never done a formal official release.
Regards
Scott
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
On 5/02/2010, at 4:52 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:
> nightly builds are not for the consuming public but for testers who's
> job it is to bang away on the application and try to break it.
> so they just download an run the build. They probably are not even
> developers, just testers
>
>
>
> Ean Schuessler sent the following on 2/5/2010 1:39 PM:
>> Adam Heath wrote:
>>> I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
>>> buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
>>> even being tested.
>>>
>> I really do agree. It jumped out at me recently that we don't have a
>> download link for a "known to be working" build that has been thoroughly
>> tested by humans. If someone checks something in to 09.04 that breaks
>> behavior but doesn't show up in the test suite then a lot of people may
>> get a bad first impression of our software. It seems like some Selenium
>> tests are the fastest way to get some better guarantees around this.
>> Right now I'm just not super confident that the latest release will
>> always be working (though it should be).
>>
>
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>.
nightly builds are not for the consuming public but for testers who's
job it is to bang away on the application and try to break it.
so they just download an run the build. They probably are not even
developers, just testers
Ean Schuessler sent the following on 2/5/2010 1:39 PM:
> Adam Heath wrote:
>> I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
>> buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
>> even being tested.
>>
> I really do agree. It jumped out at me recently that we don't have a
> download link for a "known to be working" build that has been thoroughly
> tested by humans. If someone checks something in to 09.04 that breaks
> behavior but doesn't show up in the test suite then a lot of people may
> get a bad first impression of our software. It seems like some Selenium
> tests are the fastest way to get some better guarantees around this.
> Right now I'm just not super confident that the latest release will
> always be working (though it should be).
>
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
BJ Freeman wrote:
> this is how james deals with nightly builds.
> so it is possible with in the apache infra
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report
> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 03:34:48 -0500 (EST)
> From: JAMES Nightly Build System <no...@devtech.com>
> Reply-To: James Developers List <se...@james.apache.org>
> To: JAMES Server Development <se...@james.apache.org>
>
> An automated nightly build of JAMES has been posted to
> http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Any unit test errors from the build should be reported below:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> BUILD SUCCESSFUL
> Total time: 4 minutes 38 seconds
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Done. Packages Will Be Uploaded To The Nightly Repository.
I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
even being tested.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Please review http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/BUILD.log.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>
Re: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@free.fr>.
Thanks BJ,
This will certanly help. I whish I would have more time to help, but for the moment, it's not possible yet :/
Jacques
From: "BJ Freeman" <bj...@free-man.net>
> this is how james deals with nightly builds.
> so it is possible with in the apache infra
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report
> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 03:34:48 -0500 (EST)
> From: JAMES Nightly Build System <no...@devtech.com>
> Reply-To: James Developers List <se...@james.apache.org>
> To: JAMES Server Development <se...@james.apache.org>
>
> An automated nightly build of JAMES has been posted to
> http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Any unit test errors from the build should be reported below:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> BUILD SUCCESSFUL
> Total time: 4 minutes 38 seconds
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Done. Packages Will Be Uploaded To The Nightly Repository.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Please review http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/BUILD.log.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>
Re: [Fwd: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report]
Posted by BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>.
Adam we had this before the move to the infra.
I have been making comments since 2004 about bugs and fixes.
I got tired of pushing against those that wanted to say it was ok the
way it was and do it on mine.
Stability is paramount to me.
trouble is by the time I have tested mine there changes that nullifies
my work to bring it back to the community.
Adam Heath sent the following on 2/5/2010 7:57 AM:
> BJ Freeman wrote:
>> this is how james deals with nightly builds.
>> so it is possible with in the apache infra
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: JAMES Server Nightly Build Report
>> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 03:34:48 -0500 (EST)
>> From: JAMES Nightly Build System <no...@devtech.com>
>> Reply-To: James Developers List <se...@james.apache.org>
>> To: JAMES Server Development <se...@james.apache.org>
>>
>> An automated nightly build of JAMES has been posted to
>> http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Any unit test errors from the build should be reported below:
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> BUILD SUCCESSFUL
>> Total time: 4 minutes 38 seconds
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Done. Packages Will Be Uploaded To The Nightly Repository.
>
> I vote no for this, until there are more test cases. Ofbiz is still
> buggy, with old functionality being broken, or new functionality not
> even being tested.
>
>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Please review http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/BUILD.log.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>