Re: buildbot setup

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> I'm not crazy about using a branch to announce a build success.

That's OK.  You can also use a tag, of course.

> Are developers then supposed to track two branches?

The "tested" branch is just an older version of the "trunk", so there
really aren't two branches, in terms of development.  The "tested"
branch is just a read-only mirror that's only updated when some built
test succeeded.

> Or are users going to track the tested branch but developers the
> trunk?

That'd be the idea, yes.

> What happens if there's a tracking failure, do I need to manually fix
> it ASAP?

No.

> How do we test multiple platforms and coordinate a push when
> they are all successful?

The "tested" branch should correspond to "no known problem during
build&test", so if there's a problem on one platform it should probably be
considered as a global failure.  But I don't think such problems matter
much at this stage.

> Or do we keep a separate "tested" branch for each platform and library
> combination,

Only if you're a masochist.

> I think it's better and less confusing to simply announce failures
> through another channel, perhaps as bugs.  Then silence will be the
> default, which is good for everyone, and builds will not have any
> effect on the repository.

Many people who track Emacs's trunk don't read the mailing-list (or not
regularly enough) and they get annoyed when the build fails.


        Stefan