that is released is usually built as many separate debs. If we wanted to
set up some kind of temporary deb repo for use during the test process.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Austin Hendrix via ros-release
> <ros-release@lists.ros.org <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>> wrote:
>
> For test builds for PRs, why not do the test (deb)build against
> the stable repository, instead of shadow-fixed or building?
>
> It won't catch issues caused by changes in upstream packages, but
> by testing against stable you should always have dependencies
> available (and it's stable, so the dependencies are less likely to
> be broken).
>
>
> The core will be stable. But if we only test against the public
> release repository. If you want to do a paired release of two packages
> you would have to wait a full release cycle before the first one would
> be available to attempt to build against the previously released one.
>
>
> -Austin
>
> On 11/16/2015 10:39 AM, Tully Foote via ros-release wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Indeed we agree that getting more prereleases run is
> important. That's why we've worked very hard to make sure that
> it as well as all the jobs are reproducible.
>
> The web hosted solution has elements which are nice for users.
> However, it was an expensive pain to maintain. It also
> provided an inconsistent user experience, especially if
> there's a large delay due to waiting for yours or others jobs
> to run. As long as it's reproducible it's better to users
> leverage their own resources and know reliably when things
> will run.
>
> For preventing broken releases I do also want to integrate
> test builds into the PR validation. It will more likely be a
> test debbuild rather than a prerelease. And it has trouble if
> the buildfarm is in the middle of a large rebuild and all the
> dependencies are not immediately available.
>
> Tully
>
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Daniel Stonier
> <d.stonier@gmail.com <mailto:d.stonier@gmail.com>
> <mailto:d.stonier@gmail.com <mailto:d.stonier@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
>
> Aye, thanks from me too.
>
> I'd like to +1 Jack's comments about preferring the web
> service
> that was previously available.
>
> 1. Getting things right on one web server somewhere is always
> going to be far easier than getting it right on thousands
> of users
> systems. Even if docker does make this proposition easier,
> what we
> have seen above is it still gets awkward when the dependencies
> shift (e.g. needing a custom version of docker). I also
> ran into
> problems because of python3 interfering with my environment.
>
> 2. Getting users to pre-release is a desirable thing. Less
> rosdistro PR's to approve, less red blips on the build
> chart, less
> latency for Tully to wrap up an official release into
> public. The
> less barriers there are for them to do this, I feel the
> better and
> easier the maintainence will be.
>
> Daniel.
>
>
> On 27 October 2015 at 06:12, Mani Monajjemi via ros-release
> <ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>> wrote:
>
> Thanks Tully. pre-release script now works fine
> without any issue.
>
> - Mani
>
> Mani Monajjemi
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Tully Foote via
> ros-release
> <ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>>
> wrote:
>
> I've pushed ros_buildfarm 0.2.1 it should now be
> usable
> from the debian packages.
>
> Tully
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:42 AM, William Woodall via
> ros-release <ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Jack O'Quin via
> ros-release <ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Daniel
> Stonier
> via ros-release <ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>> wrote:
>
>
> It has been a while since I've built open
> source debs, but this is above and
> beyond the
> effort required to prerelease for me
> though.
> It used to be such a fundamental part
> of the
> process - what is the current
> thinking? Given
> that its been out for at least three
> months,
> are most people just guessing,
> rebuilding on
> the farm, guessing again? Is there a
> planned
> remedy on the horizon?
>
>
> Basically, yes.
>
> Presently, the pre-release tests take more
> effort
> than just hoping for the best and then fixing
> things that break.
>
>
> Why? I've been using them for rviz and it seems to
> work fairly well. What's holding up making them
> useful? It is just the need to install it into a
> virtualenv first?
>
> My 2 cents - I'd really love to see this
> working again ;) ;) ;) ;)
>
>
> Again, what's not working? Is there an issue
> on Github
> tracking the problem?
>
>
> Saves alot of time for me not having
> to ping
> pong back and forth trying to get my
> dependencies right and I'm sure it
> makes the
> job easier on the other end avoiding
> having so
> many red blips on the radar so often.
>
>
> +1 I would find it helpful, too. I much prefer
> running the tests.
>
> The pre-docker web interface was very
> convenient.
> I think this could be, too, although it's
> annoying
> that the Trusty version of docker is too
> old to use.
>
>
> There's nothing to be done about that
> unfortunately.
>
> -- joq
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-release mailing list
> ros-release@lists.ros.org <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release
>
>
>
>
> -- William Woodall
> ROS Development Team
> william@osrfoundation.org <mailto:william@osrfoundation.org>
> <mailto:william@osrfoundation.org
> <mailto:william@osrfoundation.org>>
> http://wjwwood.io/
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-release mailing list
> ros-release@lists.ros.org <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-release mailing list
> ros-release@lists.ros.org <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-release mailing list
> ros-release@lists.ros.org <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org
> <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>>
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release
>
>
>
>
> -- Phone : +82-10-5400-3296 <tel:%2B82-10-5400-3296>
> <tel:%2B82-10-5400-3296> (010-5400-3296)
> Home: http://snorriheim.dnsdojo.com/
> Yujin Inno: http://inno.yujinrobot.com/
> <http://rnd.yujinrobot.com/>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-release mailing list
> ros-release@lists.ros.org <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-release mailing list
> ros-release@lists.ros.org <mailto:ros-release@lists.ros.org>
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release
>
>
(text/plain)