From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 18 11:30:26 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D971837B404 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.wanadoo.nl (smtp4.wanadoo.nl [194.134.35.175]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76FAE43F93 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:30:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from steve@sohara.org) Received: from ams-gw.sohara.org (p0233.nas1-asd6.dial.wanadoo.nl [62.234.208.233]) by smtp4.wanadoo.nl (Postfix) with SMTP id DC0DF40F8E; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 20:30:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 20:30:15 +0200 From: Steve O'Hara-Smith To: stable@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20030818203015.7e9dc682.steve@sohara.org> In-Reply-To: <20030817210218.8F0C9C4@CRWdog.demon.co.uk> References: <20030817045922.GA48181@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20030817210218.8F0C9C4@CRWdog.demon.co.uk> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.8) X-Face: %]+HVL}K`P8>+8ZcY-WGHP6j@&mxMo9JH6_WdgIgUGH)JX/usO0%jy7T~IVgqjumD^OBqX,Kv^-GM6mlw(fI^$"QRKyZ$?xx/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [releng_4 tinderbox] failure on alpha/alpha X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:30:27 -0000 On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:02:18 -0700 Andy Sparrow wrote: AS> Wouldn't the real issue be to control the careless committers then? Or AS> AS> to target them specifically and directly with the Tinderbox failures? Speaking as a user who tracks -stable, I like the Tinderbox reports, it is useful to know when not to attempt an update. AS> When I automated overnight builds of mutiple branches of a commercial AS> product on mutiple OS platforms, sending those build results AS> company-wide was never considered as an option. I have a similar system - the messages go to everyone who has any business tracking the development. I suspect yours do too. For FreeBSD stable builds the -stable mailing list is an appropriate way to achieve this - the *only* one. It's not the equivalent of "company wide" that would be the -announce list. AS> I just don't see why it isn't more appropriate to simply limit the AS> messages to people with a commit bit, a specific email alias, or even AS> people who checked stuff in since the last sucessful Tinderbox. Because some of us who track the branch like to know when it's broken even if we are not going to be fixing it. Your initial assumption that only those who will fix a problem care to know about it is false. Oh yes - I collect my email by dial up modem, payed by the second, I consider that the tinderbox failure messages add value to the list. I think they have also had the effect of reducing the "STABLE won't build today" threads. -- C:>WIN | Directable Mirrors The computer obeys and wins. |A Better Way To Focus The Sun You lose and Bill collects. | licenses available - see: | http://www.sohara.org/