[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?
From: |
Eric Noulard |
Subject: |
Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ? |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:07:13 +0100 |
2007/2/21, Stephane GALLES <address@hidden>:
Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
> On 2/20/07, Stephane GALLES <address@hidden> wrote:
[...]
>> ...In order to catch the compilation problems as soon as they
>> appear, would anybody be interested in a basic cruisecontrol setup
>> for TSP ? (at least to test a fresh cmake+make when something
>> is checked in, and maybe later, with some sanity test)
> That sounds interesting. How much time does it take to develop?
Yes I agree this is a good idea.
But I need to read some doc in order to fully understand how
it works. Since....
>>
>> I don't have a continuous integration server up 24/24, but
>> I can offer to write the cruisecontrol configuration file
>> and the build script adapter and someone could deploy a cruisecontrol
>> configuration in a Tomcat on a real build server.
I don't think we should really a "build server"
Each TSP developer box may be used as a build server
which sends report at the end of the build loop which has
run locally.
I really don't know if cruisecontrol is supposed to support this
but seems to me more easy to obtain than a networked
build server.
We may open a tsp-build mailing list which receives build
loops reports from any (but identified) build server.
Stéphane,
Do you think cruisecontrol may be configured that way?
Or did I miss something?
But thinking about it, I've already use other continuous integration
tools that are easier to setup that cruisecontrol (cruisecontrol is
a very versatil tool, but its conf files are sometimes hard to write and
read).
In particular :
http://luntbuild.javaforge.com/ (very nice web GUI)
> Not to
> mention a build server could act as a subversion server ;)
Exactly :)
That's just where I do not understand.
Our configuration server is Savannah which surely won't be
a build server anytime soon no?
It is even a very usual set up. (Actually that's what this dedicated
Linux distro does, http://buildix.thoughtworks.com/, but only for a
LAN, not a WAN, as the security is not managed).
I understand that but I think it does not fits what we may afford
TODAY since we have no "networked server" for installing such tools
unless anybody here wants to offer such access :))
--
Erk
- [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Stephane GALLES, 2007/02/20
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Frederik Deweerdt, 2007/02/20
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Stephane GALLES, 2007/02/21
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?,
Eric Noulard <=
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Stephane GALLES, 2007/02/21
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Yves DUFRENNE, 2007/02/21
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Eric Noulard, 2007/02/21
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Stephane GALLES, 2007/02/22
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Robert de Vries, 2007/02/22
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Frederik Deweerdt, 2007/02/22
- Re: [Tsp-devel] Continuous integration ?, Yves DUFRENNE, 2007/02/21