www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - state of the pull autotester

reply Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/pulls.ghtml

I've seen several suggestions in an older thread to improve the tester  
like posting notifications about failing tests to the corresponding pull  
request.
Any plans for that?

Also why aren't all pull requests tested there?
Jan 29 2012
next sibling parent reply Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:
On 1/29/2012 7:00 PM, Trass3r wrote:
 http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/pulls.ghtml
 
 I've seen several suggestions in an older thread to improve the tester like
posting notifications about failing tests to
 the corresponding pull request.
 Any plans for that?

Plans, yes. I haven't decided on how I want to structure it. The main thing I know is that it can't annotate with failure notifications every time it does a build that fails. My current thinking is that I'll first write a greasemonkey script that integrates the tester results into github so that there's visibility of the current state along-side the pull itself. That won't help with notifications though.
 Also why aren't all pull requests tested there?

It's a security measure to avoid building just any random bit of code that happens to be submitted. There's a white list of users it'll run tests for. I hadn't looked to see if there were requests from new people in a while. I just added you and a couple others so those requests will be tested now. Later, Brad
Jan 29 2012
parent "Daniel Murphy" <yebblies nospamgmail.com> writes:
On as side note, the pull tester sorts by what time the pull request was 
modified, not when the most recent commit was.  Is this intentional? 
Jan 29 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
 My current thinking is that I'll first write a
 greasemonkey script that integrates the tester results into github so  
 that there's visibility of the current state
 along-side the pull itself.

Sounds promising.
 It's a security measure to avoid building just any random bit of code  
 that happens to be submitted.  There's a white
 list of users it'll run tests for.  I hadn't looked to see if there were  
 requests from new people in a while.  I just
 added you and a couple others so those requests will be tested now.

Thanks :)
Jan 29 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:
On 1/29/2012 8:32 PM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
 On as side note, the pull tester sorts by what time the pull request was 
 modified, not when the most recent commit was.  Is this intentional? 
 

Yes. It's a way for request to be prioritized higher. A pull that's receiving comments is much more likely to be pulled than one that isn't, so might as well test it sooner.
Jan 29 2012
parent "Daniel Murphy" <yebblies nospamgmail.com> writes:
"Brad Roberts" <braddr puremagic.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.182.1327902075.25230.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...
 Yes.  It's a way for request to be prioritized higher.  A pull that's 
 receiving comments is much more likely to be
 pulled than one that isn't, so might as well test it sooner.

Makes sense. The pull tester is amazing, by the way. It makes life a lot easier. If anyone's wondering what to get my for my birthday, one of those machines that runs the phobos tests in 1:42 would be great.
Jan 29 2012
prev sibling parent Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
btw, another improvement would be precise time information, i.e. incl. the  
time zone.
Also they should be consistent. It seems to me like  
http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/pulls.ghtml uses a different time than  
a single result like  
http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/pull.ghtml?runid=47221
Jan 31 2012