From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 18:23:22 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] Build results for 2014-09-30 In-Reply-To: <20141001075116.7913ff52@core2quad.morethan.org> References: <20141001063012.7DD7A100CC7@stock.ovh.net> <20141001075116.7913ff52@core2quad.morethan.org> Message-ID: <20141001182322.53f6fd68@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 07:51:16 -0500, Mike Zick wrote: > > Build statistics for 2014-09-30 > > =============================== > > > > success : 121 > > failures : 15 > > timeouts : 2 > > TOTAL : 138 > > > > Looking good for so early in the cycle. Yes, even though 138 is a bit limited in terms of build numbers for one day. I believe there were some issues with the Buildroot Git server lately, maybe this has slowed down the autobuilders a bit. We used to have in the order of 200-220 builds per day. Hum, looking more, seems like all the autobuilders from Peter are no longer submitting build results. Peter? > Now the noise: > > I have noticed that recently some of the fix contributors > have been including a "few line" quote of a typical error > message in addition to the "fix(es): url" comment. > > As a read-mostly member, I find that new (habit? practice?) > very helpful when reading the daily M.L. fix messages. > > Q: > Should there be a discussion on making this additional > information a BR "recommended practice" ? I personally don't have a strong opinion. Since the autobuilder URLs are stable, and supposed to be kept around forever, I don't mind seeing only the autobuilder URL. But if the submitter decides to include a portion of the error message, then fine as well. We could imagine that doing this would give a better change of people googling for the error message, to stumble across the relevant Buildroot patch rather than just the autobuilder results. Not sure I want to make this a mandatory thing, though. We already have a lot of requirements, and doing autobuilder fixes is already not that fun, so if we raise the barrier too much, this might discourage contributors. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com