[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 13/13] RFC: Deprecate MAKEALL

[York Sun <yorksun@freescale.com>]

On 08/08/2014 02:30 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 02:19:34PM -0700, York Sun wrote:
>> On 08/08/2014 02:12 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> [snip]
>>> Oh I'm sure, but maybe we can help get everyone a better script.  For
>>> example, you've said the way your job goes currently is every commit
>>> gets a test.  But.. that's not what you need exactly it sounds like.  It
>>> sounds like you need a given gerrit issue, which can have a few commits
>>> to it, to be bisectable and compile tested.  buildman will handle this
>>> part for you, if you let it.
>>>
>> Tom,
>>
>> I agree buildman has improvements comparing with MAKEALL. I spent time
>> to make Gerrit, Jenkins and MAKEALL work together. It is not easy as
>> one would expect.  For now, if I can make builmand to build the last
>> commit, I can replace MAKEALL with buildman. But that seems not
>> working.
> 
> I believe you, I've spent a bunch of time inside of Jenkins myself (and
> then with IBM's LSF compute setup) and I'm doing some of the same
> hoop-jumping now too.  But I'm hoping maybe we can all take this as a
> chance to improve the various ad-hoc builder setups many of us have.
> 

Since we use Gerrit for internal review, each commit (proposed patch) triggers a
Jenkins event. I can change the script so no build is triggered, but I need to
explorer if buildman servers better than MAKEALL in this case. Because Jenkins
has no knowledge of the number of patches pushed, I don't think buildman has
enough information to find the "top" and start the build.

But anyway, it shouldn't stop us from moving to buildman. I just need the basic
feature available before removing MAKEALL.

York