| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Buildfarm feature request: some way to track/classify failures |
| Date: | 2007-03-20 14:04:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20070320140459.GS24234@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> The buildfarm works because it leverages our strength, namely automating
> things. But all the tagging suggestions I've seen will involve regular,
> repetitive and possibly boring work, precisely the thing we are not good
> at as a group.
You may be forgetting that Martijn and others tagged the
scan.coverity.com database. Now, there are some untagged errors, but
I'd say that that's because we don't control the tool, so we cannot fix
it if there are false positives. We do control the buildfarm however,
so we can develop systematic solutions for widespread problems (instead
of forcing us to checking and tagging every single occurance of
widespread problems).
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-03-20 14:09:08 | Re: Buildfarm feature request: some way to track/classify failures |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-03-20 13:55:07 | Re: Buildfarm feature request: some way to track/classify failures |