[Buildbot-devel] Looking for suggestions (TrySchedulers - Buildbot 0.9)

[Dustin J. Mitchell]

There are a few folks out there using 'master' right now, but it's
still early days.  It's very helpful for us to get early feedback, but
if you were to use it you'd definitely find yourself doing so :)

Dustin

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Francesco Di Mizio
<francescodimizio at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Dustin,
>
> that's what I thought too. I'll go the custom/scripting way.
>
> What about (copy and paste from above)
>
> Also I've been following http://nine.buildbot.net/#/ with interest. Since
> it's going to take a while to set all up, can it make sense for me to start
> off with 0.9 directly? Any idea as to when 0.9 might be out?
>
> Cheers,
>  Francesco
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:25 PM, Dustin J. Mitchell <dustin at v.igoro.us>
> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, at the moment the try schedulers have a fairly intricate
>> interface with Buildbot via Perspective Broker.  If you didn't want to
>> install Buildbot, but were comfortable installing Twisted and some
>> custom Python code, you could emulate `buildbot try` without too much
>> difficulty.
>>
>> Dustin
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Francesco Di Mizio
>> <francescodimizio at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello there,
>> >
>> > in the past at the company I was working for we used to have a buildbot
>> > based system mainly used for CL validation (making sure it compiles
>> > before
>> > checking it in).
>> >
>> > This was based on a minimalistic webpage that would in turn call some
>> > buildbot python api to a add a change to BB (it might have been
>> > addSourceStamp) so that it would show up on the left side of the
>> > waterfall.
>> > The schedulers being used were AnyBranchSchedulers. Without a successful
>> > 'test' a p4 trigger would prevent you from checking in.
>> >
>> > That approach can somehow be compared to
>> >
>> > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/tools/build/+/master/scripts/master/try_job_base.py
>> >
>> > I've then noticed that Buildbot comes with TrySchedulers. I am now in
>> > the
>> > middle of setting up something very similar to what I described above
>> > and
>> > was wondering if I can get away with it by using TrySchdulers.
>> >
>> > As far as I understand by reading the docs, a developer needs to run
>> > 'buildbot try', which I'd assume requires buildbot to be set up on their
>> > machine, which is a requirement I would like to avoid. Please correct me
>> > if
>> > I am wrong.
>> >
>> > Also I've been following http://nine.buildbot.net/#/ with interest.
>> > Since
>> > it's going to take a while to set all up, can it make sense for me to
>> > start
>> > off with 0.9 directly?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >  Francesco
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
>> > GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in
>> > Ashburn.
>> > Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
>> > Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant.
>> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Buildbot-devel mailing list
>> > Buildbot-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
>> >
>
>