CI Requirements - Lessons Not Learnt?
mgraesslin at kde.org
Tue Jan 17 15:49:20 GMT 2017
Am 2017-01-17 15:46, schrieb Adriaan de Groot:
> On Monday, January 16, 2017 05:32:12 PM Eike Hein wrote:
>> I'll be working up a new draft today taking some of the comments
>> so far into account, and giving sysadmin the latitude to remove
>> projects from CI at their decision if the guidelines are violated
>> and maintaining a project on CI becomes unreasonable. This limits
>> scope of enforcement (i.e. the consequences for falling out of
>> line) to participation in CI instead of the community, which
>> seems more pragmatic in hindsight.
> Thanks, Eike. It's good to have a slightly more relaxed attitude
> towards the
> procedures. On the other hand, I think that the way the discussion
> all over the distributions and #ifdefs map has obscured an important
> how important is CI to us (as a whole)?
> In this thread, various people have mentioned that the CI is important.
> one of the big consumers of KDE source (besides developers and distro
> packagers; the distro packagers are on a different schedule and can
> probably be
> ignored for now).
> But CI has a really important function: it shows us the health of the
> for everything; and that's something the release team needs, and the
> community can be interested in. So "opting out" of CI deprives us of a
> view of the state of our software products.
That would be up to the release team. If the release team has a
requirement of "build needs to be green to release" I would say the
consequence would be a product cannot be released.
On the other hand if it's a playground project which is moving fast a
working CI might not be that important if the same quality is ensured in
Just a side node for the current issue of KWin and new xkbcommon: I
consider the red CI as release blocking and will ask our release manager
to not release Plasma 5.9 if it's not solved till then. We still have
something like two weeks, so nothing to panic (yet) ;-)
More information about the kde-core-devel