Re: Gerrit versus Buildbot

[Gerald Combs <gerald () wireshark org>]

On 3/26/14 6:06 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> 2014-03-21 22:24 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey <balint () balintreczey hu>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2014-03-20 23:11 GMT-01:00 Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>:
> > > On Mar 20, 2014, at 2:24 PM, Chris Kilgour <techie () whiterocker com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 03/20/2014 01:07 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
> > > > > If the build system had open access what would keep someone from
> > > > > uploading a shell script containing a box full of weasels wearing clown
> > > > > shoes?
> > > >
> > > > Isn't the same thing true for Jenkins/buildbot spawned from gerrit?  Surely the build machines must be 
> > > > limited/sandboxed to prevent the circus from taking over the town.
> > >
> > > Currently, it's limited to building stuff to which at least one core developer is willing to give +2.  That 
> > > requires human judgement, so it's not as rigid as a hardware/software-implemented sandbox.
> > Could it please be changed to build changes having at least _+1_ from
> > a Core Developer? +2 has the meaning that it is ready for submitting
> > and using +1 for triggering build-bot would be handy.
> I have just checked and +2 did not trigger a build. I have updated
> http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Workflow accordingly.

That's currently correct. Automated builds are triggered only when
Gerrit cherry-picks a change into /master, /master-1.10, or /master-1.8.
Builds aren't triggered as a result of label changes (e.g. Code-Review).
I'm hoping to get that working in the near future.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe