To strengthen your argument, I had 385 build messages in my e-mail and
here is the breakdown:
79 of the 385 or 20.5% were outright build failures
231 of the 385, or 60% were build completed with test suite failures
52 of the 385, or 13.5% were build that successfully completed
11 of the 385, or 3% were builds that timed out (probably infrastructure
related)
12 of the 385, or 3% were builds that were fixed
Over 80% of all builds across all projects failed or had testsuite
failures.
Andy
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 11:39 -0400, Bill Burke wrote:
The productivity of teams like EJB 3.0 has been severely compromised
for
over a year because projects. 60% of the reason I didn't want to work
on EJB 3 anymore was because I would not commit anything for a week or
two and come back to find that half of my unit tests were broken. This
has gotten worse and worse as projects have split off from jboss-head.
There is ZERO peer pressure for breaking the build. Nobody cares.
Since the testsuites *ALWAYS* fail, nobody is paying attention to
regressions except for the individual projects where it fails. You even
have cases where people comment out failing tests! We just *cannot* do
the refactorings that the majority of teams want to do without a stable
testsuite.
This has to be fixed immediately. Since there is ZERO peer pressure,
there needs to be consequences for breaking the build or regressing. I
propose the following:
1. Calculate a baseline of passed vs. failed tests
2. Tag HEAD
3. If there is any testsuite regression or build breakage, freeze SVN
until the build or regressions are fixed.
4. If build or regressions are fixed within 24 hours. Rollback to
previous tag
5. If no regressions or breakage, recalculate baseline and tag head
6. GOTO 3
Bill
Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> Given the multitude of component updates and our carelessness, it's a
> rare thing to see jboss AS testsuites run at 100%, A lot of stuff is
> just checked in without testing it locally, and worse, the CC runs that
> show failures after the check-ins are ignored.
>
> The good new is we finally got there for 4.2.x. (minus
> occasional/transient timing failures), so let's keep it that way for
> that branch, and help fix the other ones, especially HEAD.
>
> On a broken testsuite it's very "convenient" to just ignore failures,
> since "somebody else must have done it".
>
> Cheers
> /Dimitris
>
> ===========================
>
> View results here ->
>
http://cruisecontrol.jboss.com/cc/buildresults/jboss-4.2-testsuite-sun-1....
>
>
> BUILD COMPLETE - build.48
> Date of build: 06/20/2007 22:31:06
> Time to build: 165 minutes 8 seconds
>
> Unit Tests: (4087) Total Errors and Failures: (0)
> All Tests Passed
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
Andrig (Andy) Miller
VP of Engineering
JBoss, a division of Red Hat