Notice: This Wiki is now read only and edits are no longer possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "CBI/Apr17 2012"
(New page: =Meeting= * March 20, 2012, 10am EST * Eclipse Conference facility ==Attendees== Andrew R., Thanh H, Igor F., Paul W., Denis R., ==Minutes== For today's CBI dev call, I'd like to t...) |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Meeting= | =Meeting= | ||
| − | * | + | * April 17, 2012, 10am EST |
* Eclipse Conference facility | * Eclipse Conference facility | ||
==Attendees== | ==Attendees== | ||
| − | Andrew R., Thanh H, Igor F., Paul W., Denis R. | + | Andrew R., Thanh H, Igor F., Paul W., Denis R. |
| − | + | ||
==Minutes== | ==Minutes== | ||
| Line 14: | Line 13: | ||
For today's CBI dev call, I'd like to talk about the results from last week's code sprint. Please see http://wiki.eclipse.org/CBI/Code_Sprint_April_11_2012 | For today's CBI dev call, I'd like to talk about the results from last week's code sprint. Please see http://wiki.eclipse.org/CBI/Code_Sprint_April_11_2012 | ||
| − | Also, I'd like to step through the criteria that Kim provided for the CBI build to see how we're doing and talk about priorities as we finish off the remaining tasks: | + | Also, I'd like to step through the criteria that Kim provided for the CBI build to see how we're doing and talk about priorities as we finish off the remaining tasks: [http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cbi-dev/msg00170.html] |
| − | [http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cbi-dev/msg00170.html] | + | |
| + | |||
| + | 1) Build the master feature that we use to construct our bundles from the map files of an existing build, for instance a milestone build. You can't compare two builds just from the master branch as the content is fluid. [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=367581 Bug 367581] | ||
| + | 2) Build the appropriate platform zips for LTS + all products and features that are submitted to Juno. This includes Equinox features. [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=376987 Bug 376987] | ||
| + | 3) No compile errors, same compile warnings as regular build. | ||
| − | + | No compile errors <= check, this is in good shape | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | Same warnings <= hmm, should we open a Bug to track work to compare somehow? Is there a sensible way to compare maven/tycho output to PDE? | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | 4) Run all our JUnit tests. They should have the same results as the regular platform build. [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=377410 Bug 377410] - high rate of pass with some issues | |
| − | + | 5) Run a binary comparator against the bundles to ensure that they are the same binary content as the regular bundles, once all the versions and qualifiers are the same. There is a p2.mirror Ant task for this purpose. [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=367581 Bug 367581], [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=378234 Bug 378234] | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | 6) The bundles should have the same major.minor.service.qualifier as the bundles that result from the regular build. My understanding is that Tycho produces bundles with unique versions each build. This is not acceptable as it forces the user to spuriously download bundles where the content is the same. In an effort to be good Eclipse citizens and reduce our bandwidth utilization we only push new bundles to our repo when the content has actually changed. [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=367581 Bug 367581] | |
| − | regular | + | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | [[Category:CBI| ]] | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
Latest revision as of 09:17, 10 May 2017
Meeting
- April 17, 2012, 10am EST
- Eclipse Conference facility
Attendees
Andrew R., Thanh H, Igor F., Paul W., Denis R.
Minutes
For today's CBI dev call, I'd like to talk about the results from last week's code sprint. Please see http://wiki.eclipse.org/CBI/Code_Sprint_April_11_2012
Also, I'd like to step through the criteria that Kim provided for the CBI build to see how we're doing and talk about priorities as we finish off the remaining tasks: [1]
1) Build the master feature that we use to construct our bundles from the map files of an existing build, for instance a milestone build. You can't compare two builds just from the master branch as the content is fluid. Bug 367581
2) Build the appropriate platform zips for LTS + all products and features that are submitted to Juno. This includes Equinox features. Bug 376987
3) No compile errors, same compile warnings as regular build.
No compile errors <= check, this is in good shape
Same warnings <= hmm, should we open a Bug to track work to compare somehow? Is there a sensible way to compare maven/tycho output to PDE?
4) Run all our JUnit tests. They should have the same results as the regular platform build. Bug 377410 - high rate of pass with some issues
5) Run a binary comparator against the bundles to ensure that they are the same binary content as the regular bundles, once all the versions and qualifiers are the same. There is a p2.mirror Ant task for this purpose. Bug 367581, Bug 378234
6) The bundles should have the same major.minor.service.qualifier as the bundles that result from the regular build. My understanding is that Tycho produces bundles with unique versions each build. This is not acceptable as it forces the user to spuriously download bundles where the content is the same. In an effort to be good Eclipse citizens and reduce our bandwidth utilization we only push new bundles to our repo when the content has actually changed. Bug 367581