[Development] On the reliability of CI

Sergio Ahumada sergio.ahumada at digia.com
Fri Oct 26 13:36:04 CEST 2012


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)


Sergio Ahumada
Quality Engineer - Digia, Qt

More information about the Development mailing list