KDE/CI for KF5

[Ben Cooksley]

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Marko Käning <mk-lists at email.de> wrote:
> Hi Ben,

Hi Marko,

>
> On 08 Mar 2015, at 04:05 , Ben Cooksley <bcooksley at kde.org> wrote:
>> Not entirely. What we probably need is a better way for developers to
>> communicate to people on the porting status.
>
> yes, I guess so.
>
>
>> The best way to do this would probably be through the build metadata -
>> if the branch has been set then we can probably assume developers
>> think it is ready.
>
> Existence of the branch alone isn’t enough, as Christoph and I noticed.
>
>
>> Anything being released needs to have CI really. If the tarballs end
>> up on download.kde.org, it should be Green on CI first.
>
> OK, everything with a tarball on download.kde.org? Well, I will integrate
> such a check in my CI scripts.
>
>
>> That is quite a bit of effort for little return.
>
> You can say that again.
>
>
>> Out of interest, what was the primary blocker to getting things to
>> build? 140 seems quite high as a number….
>
> Yes, that’s a lot, more general failures are due to
>
>  - porting to KF5 not yet done
>  - missing Qt stuff (e.g. Qt5GStreamer, Qt5WebEngine, AccountsQt5, SignOnQt5)
>  - QCA2 (even a problem on Linux)
>
>
> and OSX-specific:
>
>  - some dependency on X11
>  - issues with the correct location of libs installed through MacPorts
>  - missing dependencies on MacPorts
>  - Apple’s clang not supported
>  - linking issues
>
> I have left a few comments in my "tier 5" list of projects [1] and more
> outdated on [2].
>
>
>> Anything in Extragear, Frameworks or kde/* should be covered by CI
>> really. If it can't build, we need to fix that.
>
> OK. Everything IS a lot, too much in fact, so we need to focus! This must
> be helped by the project developers themselves. I think every project
> should cross-check against Christoph’s site [3] and verify the fairly
> detailed - automagically determined - porting status information.
>
> What about introducing a status change notification feature for [3]?
> That way the CI team could get informed once a project newly arrives or
> somehow updates (by e.g. removing kdelibs4support) on KF5? I think this
> would be a real help for a more effective KDE/CI.

As an alternative, let's wait for now until the new system is ready to
launch. It will have support for Windows and OSX (assuming we can get
enough nodes attached).
This would reduce the workload on you as everything would be
significantly more automated, not manual.

>From there we can determine what needs CI and what doesn't.
In essence, I think that is stuff we release + stuff we are looking at
releasing soon (ie. playground things which will be moving to main
modules, or frameworks branches which will be reviewed + merged soon).

>
> Greets,
> Marko
>

Cheers,
Ben

>
>
>
>
> [1] http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=clones%2Fwebsites%2Fbuild-kde-org%2Fkaning%2Fmp-osx-ci.git&a=blob&h=d582668b5ddf434948b39257bf4db673b9f69add&hb=daa9eafdc6186a5a60cc46ac3dd9e23e5f76611d&f=tier5.fw
>
> [2] https://trac.macports.org/wiki/KDEProblems/KDEMacPortsCI/Status/ProjectsBeyondKF5
>
> [3] http://developer.kde.org/~cfeck/portingstatus.html
>