Feature #8655
Lead the discussion to specify what kind of branch needs to be automatically built, and when
100%
Description
- which branches?
- daily/post-commit?
Subtasks
Related issues
|
Related to Tails - |
Rejected | 2015-06-18 | |
|
Blocks Tails - |
Resolved | 2015-01-09 | 2015-07-15 |
History
#1 Updated by intrigeri 2015-01-09 17:41:58
- blocks
Feature #8656: Write code that generates a set of Jenkins jobs for all branches we want to automatically build added
#2 Updated by intrigeri 2015-01-09 17:42:49
- Category changed from Infrastructure to Continuous Integration
#3 Updated by intrigeri 2015-01-09 17:44:54
- blocked by deleted (
Feature #8656: Write code that generates a set of Jenkins jobs for all branches we want to automatically build
#4 Updated by intrigeri 2015-01-09 17:45:22
- blocks
Feature #8657: Write library code that implements the branch to build parameters mapping added
#5 Updated by bertagaz 2015-01-10 05:54:35
- Due date set to 2015-02-24
- Target version changed from Tails_1.4 to Tails_1.3
#6 Updated by bertagaz 2015-01-11 19:08:47
- % Done changed from 0 to 10
- Blueprint set to https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/automated_builds_and_tests/autobuild_specs/
Add a blueprint, thread started on tails-dev@
#7 Updated by bertagaz 2015-01-11 23:54:54
- Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
#9 Updated by Dr_Whax 2015-02-24 23:26:14
- Target version changed from Tails_1.3 to Tails_1.3.2
This discussion is still ongoing. Postponing to 1.3.1
#10 Updated by Dr_Whax 2015-02-26 14:02:28
Waiting for input from anonym
#11 Updated by intrigeri 2015-03-05 21:20:33
What’s the status here? Is there any pending discussion or remaining blocker?
#12 Updated by intrigeri 2015-03-16 19:11:08
Ping?
#13 Updated by bertagaz 2015-04-06 17:16:05
- Assignee changed from Dr_Whax to bertagaz
- Target version changed from Tails_1.3.2 to Tails_1.4
#14 Updated by intrigeri 2015-05-09 02:07:56
- Target version changed from Tails_1.4 to Tails_1.4.1
Postponing.
#15 Updated by intrigeri 2015-05-29 11:36:38
- blocks #8668 added
#16 Updated by intrigeri 2015-05-29 11:59:59
- % Done changed from 10 to 70
Apart of some leftovers of the discussion wrt. notifications (just replied to it on -dev@), I think we’re done here.
#17 Updated by intrigeri 2015-06-18 07:34:34
intrigeri wrote:
> Apart of some leftovers of the discussion wrt. notifications (just replied to it on -dev@), I think we’re done here.
Looks like those leftovers were taken care of, eventually. Can we call this done, or?
#18 Updated by bertagaz 2015-06-18 08:29:28
I’m not sure they are, have a look at this last email
#19 Updated by intrigeri 2015-06-18 08:38:44
> I’m not sure they are, have a look at this last email
OK… oh well, there seemed to be a consensus months ago, and the resulting spec has been implemented, so IMO this specific idea of refining notifications can be postponed, tracked by a dedicated ticket, and thus this one can be closed.
#20 Updated by bertagaz 2015-06-18 11:59:58
- related to
Feature #9615: Consider notifying both committer and author for development branches added
#21 Updated by bertagaz 2015-06-18 12:03:13
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
- Assignee deleted (
bertagaz) - % Done changed from 70 to 100
intrigeri wrote:
> > I’m not sure they are, have a look at this last email
>
> OK… oh well, there seemed to be a consensus months ago, and the resulting spec has been implemented, so IMO this specific idea of refining notifications can be postponed, tracked by a dedicated ticket, and thus this one can be closed.
Ack, that’d mean quite a change to our current design and deployment. I’ve created 9615 to track the state of this refinement idea. We’ll see once running live.
#22 Updated by sajolida 2015-08-05 09:29:45
- Due date changed from 2015-02-24 to 2015-06-01