Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] 6 month release cycle

[Mickael Istria <mistria@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/09/2013 11:59 AM, Dennis Hübner wrote:

A lot of failed builds were caused by missing (suddenly deleted/disappeared) artifacts not by incoming model changes.

So autovalidation by Jenkins will probably prevent maintainers to submit a patch which fixes, but depends on the broken master state.

So IMHO gerrit would not eliminate the problem in the whole, but can probably make the maintenance not that easy

That's right, but the value of code review is mainly in educating (mid-term/long-term benefit). Currently, it seems like (some) people push stuff to aggregator without understanding that this needs to be stable content. Having a code review phase saying: "I'm ok to merge this in aggregator if you confirm the submission conforms to Simultaneous Release requirements and that it is a stable URL that won't disappear" would probably help, on medium to long term, to avoid bad contributions to aggregator and then to make build more stable.
When I was a younger contributor to Eclipse, i did contribute some stuff to the release train which broke some builds. It happened because I did not understand enough the requirements and workflow of the aggregation. I guess it's the case for some other contributors. Code review would have prevented me from breaking build.

Time to review such a patch: a few minutes.
Time to notice a build is broken + to route error to the right contributor + to disable the contribution + to rebuild: a few hours.

--
Mickael Istria
Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat
My blog - My Tweets