From ckponnappa at gmail.com Wed Jul 1 04:39:58 2009 From: ckponnappa at gmail.com (C. K. Ponnappa) Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:09:58 +0530 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Moving tickets from jira to lighthouse Message-ID: <4A4B20DE.6040106@gmail.com> Folks, it looks like there are a large number of tickets open on Jira (http://jira.public.thoughtworks.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=10070&status=1) which we should start moving to lighthouse and closing. Is there any way to automate this? Best, Sidu. From ckponnappa at gmail.com Wed Jul 1 05:16:43 2009 From: ckponnappa at gmail.com (C. K. Ponnappa) Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:46:43 +0530 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Emails from lighthouse to cc devel? Message-ID: <4A4B297B.1090609@gmail.com> Is it possible set up Lighthouse to to send notifications cc-devel so we know when tickets are created/resolved? Thanks, Sidu. From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Wed Jul 1 16:43:25 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:43:25 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] More git hang problems Message-ID: I'm reopening this ticket, I recently saw two servers with builds hung on git fetch origin. I thought we had fixed this by wrapping in a timeout, but apparently not. https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150-cruise-control-rb/tickets/229-sometimes-git-hangs This is hard to reproduce, I haven't figure out how to make it happen in a controlled setting. Any advice is welcome... From btguthrie at gmail.com Thu Jul 2 16:32:06 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:32:06 -0500 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Tickets reorganized Message-ID: Hi all, I've reorganized and added some tickets in Lighthouse, and moved many from Next to Current. Please log in when you get a chance and see if there's anything you'd like to take ownership of. Brian From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Thu Jul 2 17:05:08 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:05:08 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master broken, ~/.cruise does not get autocreated Message-ID: Just saw this. Problem doesn't exist in 1.4.0 tag. Can open a bug if you want... Thanks, -- Chad From btguthrie at gmail.com Sat Jul 4 15:02:31 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 14:02:31 -0500 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Contribution policy Message-ID: Hi all, Had a chat with TW legal. We still need to keep the contributor's agreement, unfortunately, but luckily it's just email these days, which isn't so bad. The contribution policy, though, is apparently something we came up with. Right now it involves users submitting Git-formatted patches through Lighthouse. Agree that contributions should have an associated Lighthouse ticket but is there any reason why we can't honor Github pull requests directly by linking a the ticket to the changeset of the merge, such as it is? That seems like it'd be easier than making people go through the process of generating a patch, although I suppose it might make it easier to judge the quality of the contributions. Brian From btguthrie at gmail.com Sat Jul 4 15:16:33 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 14:16:33 -0500 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] A question about dependencies Message-ID: CCRB follows an include-all-dependencies rule to make setup as simple as possible. Just to clarify, does that mean that when we integrate (say) a Twitter notification plugin that we also need to add the Twitter gem to our list of gem dependencies, and vendorize it accordingly? If so that's cool, it just sort of strikes me as odd. Of course, the alternative--making the user provide and link their own Twitter gem--is potentially a headache. Brian From btguthrie at gmail.com Sun Jul 5 01:21:13 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 00:21:13 -0500 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] A question about dependencies In-Reply-To: <3945c4270907042206w2be9c3c4i2f6ccdb53fab8c4b@mail.gmail.com> References: <3945c4270907042206w2be9c3c4i2f6ccdb53fab8c4b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: That was my thought. Have you guys traditionally asked people to maintain separate plugin repos in the past? I'm asking for two reasons: - The GH account has a pending pull request for a Twitter plugin that I'm thinking about how to integrate. - I've seen community requests for things like Twitter support and I think it'd be nice to provide easy access to it. Would it be worth considering maintaining a cruisecontrol.rb-contrib repository that attempts to aggregate all of the add-ons, or would that just become tricky to maintain from our standpoint? There's a fair amount of infrastructure devoted to this in cruise_plugin.rb but I'm not clear on how much is stuff we've written vs. inherited from Rails' plugin installer, from which it seems (at first glance) to be derived. Either way it would be good to keep a relatively painless add-on process. Cheers, Brian On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote: > On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Brian Guthrie wrote: >> >> CCRB follows an include-all-dependencies rule to make setup as simple >> as possible. Just to clarify, does that mean that when we integrate >> (say) a Twitter notification plugin that we also need to add the >> Twitter gem to our list of gem dependencies, and vendorize it >> accordingly? If so that's cool, it just sort of strikes me as odd. Of >> course, the alternative--making the user provide and link their own >> Twitter gem--is potentially a headache. > > I don't think this would be a god idea. You'll soon end up vendorizing > everything and the kitchen sink. Stuff like Twitter plugin is better off as > separate addons. > > -- > Alexey Verkhovsky > http://alex-verkhovsky.blogspot.com/ > CruiseControl.rb [http://cruisecontrolrb.thoughtworks.com] > > > _______________________________________________ > Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list > Cruisecontrolrb-developers at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers > > From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Sun Jul 5 15:17:29 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 12:17:29 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] 1.4.0 tagged on github In-Reply-To: References: <4A48A81C.8040703@gmail.com> <51023C08-32D2-4752-BA56-97D231EA72CA@gmail.com> <4A4A3C81.1070000@gmail.com> <3945c4270906300935q7274fe22r8811eb36b585a175@mail.gmail.com> <648eacf20906300939m245cd8f5sabf44d78793f21de@mail.gmail.com> <3945c4270906301710r50391102u2de61fde4145b5fd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Bret Pettichord wrote: > I use CC.rb on Windows. I'd say forget about the line endings. Yes, it means > you can't use notepad, no big deal. +1. If you are using Notepad for looking at code, you've got much larger problems than line endings... From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Sun Jul 5 15:23:50 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 12:23:50 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] A question about dependencies In-Reply-To: <3945c4270907051047q66c05e51ya0aed2f096cd976d@mail.gmail.com> References: <3945c4270907042206w2be9c3c4i2f6ccdb53fab8c4b@mail.gmail.com> <3945c4270907051047q66c05e51ya0aed2f096cd976d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote: > There is a -contrib project on RubyForge: > http://rubyforge.org/projects/ccrb-contrib, and I just added Brian as admin > there. > It is exactly the kind of thing you are talking about. So, I suggest > migrating it to Github and adding the Twitter thingie in there. And just > giving the plugin author direct commit rights to it. Where on github should these live? I think that each plugin should be a separate project on the thoughtworks github account. That way, we can granularly allow anyone to be a collaborator on a plugin (and checkout, fork individually, etc). -- Chad From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Sun Jul 5 15:31:51 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 12:31:51 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Contribution policy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Brian Guthrie wrote: > is there any reason why we can't honor Github > pull requests directly by linking a the ticket to the changeset of the > merge, such as it is? Here's some I can think of (let me know if I'm wrong on any) * git-formatted patches preserve the original author as well as the committer. * patches are also less work for the committer (don't have to do the work of figuring out the revision and merging) * Patches remain even if the person deletes their repo/branch off github * Patches provide more focus if the changeset no longer applies cleanly * Everything is public and consolidated for comment and competing patches (only account admins can see and reply to pull requests) -- Chad From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Sun Jul 5 15:41:03 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 12:41:03 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] A question about dependencies In-Reply-To: <3945c4270907051234u276a112bj1fdf381dd86db0ec@mail.gmail.com> References: <3945c4270907042206w2be9c3c4i2f6ccdb53fab8c4b@mail.gmail.com> <3945c4270907051047q66c05e51ya0aed2f096cd976d@mail.gmail.com> <3945c4270907051234u276a112bj1fdf381dd86db0ec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote: > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Chad Woolley > wrote: >> >> Where on github should these live? >> >> I think that each plugin should be a separate project on the >> thoughtworks github account. > > I think the original motivation to keep it all together was so that it was > easier to discover these things. Sure, it is fine for them all to stay in one project. I guess there are more reasons to keep them together than split them up. From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Sun Jul 5 15:43:22 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 12:43:22 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master broken, ~/.cruise does not get autocreated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: > Just saw this. ?Problem doesn't exist in 1.4.0 tag. ?Can open a bug if > you want... Opened a bug: https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150-cruise-control-rb/tickets/259-cruise-does-not-get-autocreated-by-cruise-start From btguthrie at gmail.com Sun Jul 5 21:27:58 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 20:27:58 -0500 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] A question about dependencies In-Reply-To: References: <3945c4270907042206w2be9c3c4i2f6ccdb53fab8c4b@mail.gmail.com> <3945c4270907051047q66c05e51ya0aed2f096cd976d@mail.gmail.com> <3945c4270907051234u276a112bj1fdf381dd86db0ec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Let's keep 'em together for now. If it starts to become ridiculous we can always split everything up into its own project. Brian On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Alexey > Verkhovsky wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Chad Woolley >> wrote: >>> >>> Where on github should these live? >>> >>> I think that each plugin should be a separate project on the >>> thoughtworks github account. >> >> I think the original motivation to keep it all together was so that it was >> easier to discover these things. > > Sure, it is fine for them all to stay in one project. ?I guess there > are more reasons to keep them together than split them up. > _______________________________________________ > Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list > Cruisecontrolrb-developers at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers > From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Tue Jul 14 00:05:43 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:05:43 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Possible patch, and question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 8:06 AM, Esteban Manchado Vel?zquez wrote: > ? ?Are you interested in such a patch? Yes! Can you please create a ticket on LightHouse, and attach your patch? https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150-cruise-control-rb Thanks... From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Fri Jul 17 05:31:53 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 02:31:53 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master branch is badly broken since rails 2.3 branch merge Message-ID: Many things broken: - does not create ~/.cruise - Blew up reading my config file, so I couldn't even start a builder - no longer runs on port 3333 Basically, master doesn't even work. Is this gonna get fixed, or should we rollback this merge? Thanks, -- Chad From btguthrie at gmail.com Mon Jul 20 00:43:03 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 00:43:03 -0400 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master branch is badly broken since rails 2.3 branch merge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Chad, I've resolved the port 3333 issue and a separate issue related to some work I've been doing with the Projects class that may or may not be related to what you're encountering. As for reading your config file, I haven't seen a stack trace with that so I'd appreciate it if you'd send it along. I haven't seen the issue with ~/.cruise either. Frankly I hadn't expected that too many people would be trying to build against HEAD as it's not stable. TW doesn't give me any paid time to work on this thing either so I'm what I can in the spare hours I have. Keep bringing issues up and I'll do my best to resolve them in a timely manner. And to answer your question, not only do I not see any particular reason to roll back the merge, I've pushed enough additional work since then that it would seem at this point infeasible to do so. Let me know if you feel strongly about it. Brian On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Chad Woolley wrote: > Many things broken: > > - does not create ~/.cruise > - Blew up reading my config file, so I couldn't even start a builder > - no longer runs on port 3333 > > Basically, master doesn't even work. > > Is this gonna get fixed, or should we rollback this merge? > > Thanks, > -- Chad > _______________________________________________ > Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list > Cruisecontrolrb-developers at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers > From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Mon Jul 20 02:46:35 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 23:46:35 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master branch is badly broken since rails 2.3 branch merge In-Reply-To: <648eacf20907192333w72ce7f1ah9c6509862e3f4711@mail.gmail.com> References: <648eacf20907192333w72ce7f1ah9c6509862e3f4711@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Jeremy Lightsmith wrote: > Brian, > > We definitely appreciate all the hard work you've been doing.? Thank you. Yep, thanks a lot. > I did want to clarify one point though.? We have have set the expectation > with our users that HEAD is a good, fairly stable place to point at.? We've > told people to go to it if they wanted git support, or mercurial, for > example.? And, with the ccrb team being so long between releases, many if > not most people that use ccrb right now are using it from HEAD.? We've kept > it pretty stable and tight for quite a while now, though granted we haven't > made any huge changes in a while either. Totally. I run almost all my installations on the master branch, and have various scripts automated to check out master. I really want to keep it solid. Also, if the master branch isn't working for me, I can't run any patches I am testing on live servers. > It sound like from what you're saying, at this point it would be easier to > go forward than back.? So, Chad, can we get those stack traces?? And, Brian, > if you don't have time, as Chad gives us more info, or if it might be a few > days before you do, can you let the list know so maybe one of us could look > at it? Yep, here they are. * The ~/.cruise dir creation problem isn't happening anymore, I marked that ticket as invalid and tagged not reproducible. * The problem reading the config file (including stacktrace) is in this ticket: https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150/tickets/264-error-reading-site_configrb * I also notice the -d (--daemon) option to ./cruise start no longer works (server just dies). I'd really like to see this fixed too, because it breaks the init script (daemon/cruise) on my servers. There used to be a bunch of hacked/pasted code in script/server which is now gone. I debugged it for a bit but couldn't find it, probably a stack trace getting swallowed somewhere. Here's the ticket for that one: https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150/tickets/265-cruise-start-no-longer-works-with-d-daemon-option Let me know if you need any more info or help on these. Thanks, -- Chad From paul at texperts.com Tue Jul 21 12:32:04 2009 From: paul at texperts.com (Paul Butcher) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 17:32:04 +0100 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Avoiding polling source control Message-ID: <2767CFD6-8789-411B-B488-88DA7E3B96F0@texperts.com> We've been successfully using a patched version of CC.rb 1.1.0 for a long time. We're just in the process of migrating to 1.4.0, however. The patch we've been using modifies CC.rb so that it doesn't need to poll source control (we were getting complaints from the guys who host our Subversion server). Instead, we use a post-commit hook to notify CC.rb that the repository has changed. I submitted this patch to the old JIRA tracking system way back: http://jira.public.thoughtworks.org/browse/CCRB-140 But got no response. I notice that things are a little more active in CC.rb-land recently, however :-) Would there be any interest in getting this functionality into the latest version? If so, I'll work on getting it into a fit state to be applied to the latest source. I'm intrigued that nobody else seems having issues with polling? ------------------------------------------------ Paul Butcher CTO Texperts Mobile: +44 (0) 7740 857648 Main: +44 (0) 1223 309080 Fax: +44(0) 1223 309082 Email: paul at texperts.com MSN: paul at paulbutcher.com AIM: paulrabutcher Skype: paulrabutcher LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulbutcher ------------------------------------------------ Re5ult Limited Registered in England No 04909795 VAT registration number GB 849 201 231. Registered office 74 Eden Street Cambridge CB1 1EL This email is confidential. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Tue Jul 21 12:57:42 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 09:57:42 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Avoiding polling source control In-Reply-To: <2767CFD6-8789-411B-B488-88DA7E3B96F0@texperts.com> References: <2767CFD6-8789-411B-B488-88DA7E3B96F0@texperts.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Paul Butcher wrote: > I'm intrigued that nobody else seems having issues with polling? I would want this to be optional, and not the default. The problem with not polling is that you can miss revisions and not build if your CI server (or the network) happens to be down when the commit hook happens. This is why systems that don't support polling (like Integrity) are a no-go for me. As for the load on our subversion server, we had some problems when we had dozens of CI servers hitting our SVN, but we got around that by just increasing the polling interval on all our servers. Even that was just because we had an old crappy SVN server, when we upgraded our SVN server it had no problems with the load. -- Chad From paul at texperts.com Tue Jul 21 16:22:42 2009 From: paul at texperts.com (Paul Butcher) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:22:42 +0100 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Avoiding polling source control In-Reply-To: <3945c4270907210948r1809a7e7sff82f7feb8839ac7@mail.gmail.com> References: <2767CFD6-8789-411B-B488-88DA7E3B96F0@texperts.com> <3945c4270907210948r1809a7e7sff82f7feb8839ac7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 21 Jul 2009, at 17:48, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote: > Never been an issue for me. Why should svn log once every few > seconds be an issue, unless you have tens of these things going > against the same server, all at the same time? We have 11 projects under Cruise (with another 2 or 3 on the way) each of which uses several "svn:external"s. All up, using the default polling interval, that results in quite a lot of requests. I've no idea what kind of hardware the Subversion server's running on, but we share it with a few other clients of our hosting providers and they contacted us to ask if we could reduce the load. We can, of course, increase the polling interval, but we've got quite used to the server building immediately after a checkin. It's not essential, but it is nice to minimize the interval between a "bad" checkin and finding out about it. And a post-commit hook gives us that without any downside. ------------------------------------------------ Paul Butcher CTO Texperts Mobile: +44 (0) 7740 857648 Main: +44 (0) 1223 309080 Fax: +44(0) 1223 309082 Email: paul at texperts.com MSN: paul at paulbutcher.com AIM: paulrabutcher Skype: paulrabutcher LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulbutcher ------------------------------------------------ Re5ult Limited Registered in England No 04909795 VAT registration number GB 849 201 231. Registered office 74 Eden Street Cambridge CB1 1EL This email is confidential. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. From paul at texperts.com Tue Jul 21 16:24:38 2009 From: paul at texperts.com (Paul Butcher) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:24:38 +0100 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Avoiding polling source control In-Reply-To: References: <2767CFD6-8789-411B-B488-88DA7E3B96F0@texperts.com> Message-ID: <46E513B7-AD06-4890-A157-085BBB05A0CD@texperts.com> On 21 Jul 2009, at 17:57, Chad Woolley wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Paul Butcher > wrote: >> I'm intrigued that nobody else seems having issues with polling? > > I would want this to be optional, and not the default. The problem > with not polling is that you can miss revisions and not build if your > CI server (or the network) happens to be down when the commit hook > happens. This is why systems that don't support polling (like > Integrity) are a no-go for me. Of course. We actually use a hybrid scheme with a very long polling interval (12 hours, although clearly this could be tailored to suit local conditions) which helps catch that case. ------------------------------------------------ Paul Butcher CTO Texperts Mobile: +44 (0) 7740 857648 Main: +44 (0) 1223 309080 Fax: +44(0) 1223 309082 Email: paul at texperts.com MSN: paul at paulbutcher.com AIM: paulrabutcher Skype: paulrabutcher LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulbutcher ------------------------------------------------ Re5ult Limited Registered in England No 04909795 VAT registration number GB 849 201 231. Registered office 74 Eden Street Cambridge CB1 1EL This email is confidential. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Tue Jul 21 16:41:13 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:41:13 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Avoiding polling source control In-Reply-To: References: <2767CFD6-8789-411B-B488-88DA7E3B96F0@texperts.com> <3945c4270907210948r1809a7e7sff82f7feb8839ac7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Paul Butcher wrote: > On 21 Jul 2009, at 17:48, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote: >> >> Never been an issue for me. Why should svn log once every few seconds be >> an issue, unless you have tens of these things going against the same >> server, all at the same time? > > > We have 11 projects under Cruise (with another 2 or 3 on the way) each of > which uses several "svn:external"s. All up, using the default polling > interval, that results in quite a lot of requests. I've no idea what kind of > hardware the Subversion server's running on, but we share it with a few > other clients of our hosting providers and they contacted us to ask if we > could reduce the load. One other thing - I have noticed if you do commits ACROSS externals and a parent project, this can really kill the SVN server to resolve the log especially if it isn't beefy. It was thrashing or something, probably IO bound reading different locations in repo. To mitigate this, I got in the habit of doing separate commits for externals vs. parent project - or alternately do a dummy commit to the parent project after the externals commit, so that shows up in the cruise log instead of the big cross-repo commit. Maybe that is your current problem? From paul at texperts.com Wed Jul 22 10:09:50 2009 From: paul at texperts.com (Paul Butcher) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:09:50 +0100 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Avoiding polling source control In-Reply-To: References: <2767CFD6-8789-411B-B488-88DA7E3B96F0@texperts.com> <3945c4270907210948r1809a7e7sff82f7feb8839ac7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <517E0E7D-EB9F-4DCB-B56D-2C46EDB8F098@texperts.com> On 21 Jul 2009, at 21:41, Chad Woolley wrote: > One other thing - I have noticed if you do commits ACROSS externals > and a parent project, this can really kill the SVN server to resolve > the log especially if it isn't beefy. It was thrashing or something, > probably IO bound reading different locations in repo. To mitigate > this, I got in the habit of doing separate commits for externals vs. > parent project - or alternately do a dummy commit to the parent > project after the externals commit, so that shows up in the cruise log > instead of the big cross-repo commit. Maybe that is your current > problem? I doubt it, because the issue definitely seems to be caused by CruiseControl polling (i.e. when we stop it from doing so, the server can cope just fine). But thanks for the suggestion! ------------------------------------------------ Paul Butcher CTO Texperts Mobile: +44 (0) 7740 857648 Main: +44 (0) 1223 309080 Fax: +44(0) 1223 309082 Email: paul at texperts.com MSN: paul at paulbutcher.com AIM: paulrabutcher Skype: paulrabutcher LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulbutcher ------------------------------------------------ Re5ult Limited Registered in England No 04909795 VAT registration number GB 849 201 231. Registered office 74 Eden Street Cambridge CB1 1EL This email is confidential. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. From btguthrie at gmail.com Sun Jul 26 15:57:32 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:57:32 -0400 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master branch is badly broken since rails 2.3 branch merge In-Reply-To: References: <648eacf20907192333w72ce7f1ah9c6509862e3f4711@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi guys, Sorry for the long delay in resolving these. I've just pushed fixes for the site_config issue (Configuration was getting loaded at the wrong spot) and the ports issue. I'd like to try avoiding modifying Rails files directly if we can so as to avoid these upgrade issues in the future, so I'm mutating ARGV in CruiseControl::Init in order to accomplish this; if this is a terrible idea and there's a compelling reason to do it by modifying Rails stuff directly, please let me know and we can switch it over. Many apologies for the broken HEAD on master. I'll try harder in the future to resolve that state of affairs more quickly in the future. Cheers, Brian On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:46 AM, Chad Woolley wrote: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Jeremy > Lightsmith wrote: >> Brian, >> >> We definitely appreciate all the hard work you've been doing.? Thank you. > > Yep, thanks a lot. > >> I did want to clarify one point though.? We have have set the expectation >> with our users that HEAD is a good, fairly stable place to point at.? We've >> told people to go to it if they wanted git support, or mercurial, for >> example.? And, with the ccrb team being so long between releases, many if >> not most people that use ccrb right now are using it from HEAD.? We've kept >> it pretty stable and tight for quite a while now, though granted we haven't >> made any huge changes in a while either. > > Totally. ?I run almost all my installations on the master branch, and > have various scripts automated to check out master. ?I really want to > keep it solid. > > Also, if the master branch isn't working for me, I can't run any > patches I am testing on live servers. > >> It sound like from what you're saying, at this point it would be easier to >> go forward than back.? So, Chad, can we get those stack traces?? And, Brian, >> if you don't have time, as Chad gives us more info, or if it might be a few >> days before you do, can you let the list know so maybe one of us could look >> at it? > > Yep, here they are. > > * The ~/.cruise dir creation problem isn't happening anymore, I marked > that ticket as invalid and tagged not reproducible. > > * The problem reading the config file (including stacktrace) is in > this ticket: ?https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150/tickets/264-error-reading-site_configrb > > * I also notice the -d (--daemon) option to ./cruise start no longer > works (server just dies). ?I'd really like to see this fixed too, > because it breaks the init script (daemon/cruise) on my servers. > There used to be a bunch of hacked/pasted code in script/server which > is now gone. ?I debugged it for a bit but couldn't find it, probably a > stack trace getting swallowed somewhere. ?Here's the ticket for that > one: ?https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150/tickets/265-cruise-start-no-longer-works-with-d-daemon-option > > Let me know if you need any more info or help on these. > > Thanks, > -- Chad > _______________________________________________ > Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list > Cruisecontrolrb-developers at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers > From btguthrie at gmail.com Mon Jul 27 20:13:12 2009 From: btguthrie at gmail.com (Brian Guthrie) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:13:12 -0400 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master branch is badly broken since rails 2.3 branch merge In-Reply-To: References: <648eacf20907192333w72ce7f1ah9c6509862e3f4711@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Appreciate it Chad, I'll take a look. Many thanks to both you and Jeremy for keeping the fire burning. Cheers, Brian On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Chad Woolley wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Chad Woolley > wrote: >> >> Also, I just tried the fixes on the master branch, and they seem to work >> with a couple of exceptions (I'll note on the tickets).? Thanks everyone! > > Here are the remaining issues I found, I opened a new ticket: > > https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150-cruise-control-rb/tickets/267-remaining-issues-with-rails-upgrade > > Assigned ticket to Brian, but let me know if you need help. > > Thanks, > -- Chad > > > _______________________________________________ > Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list > Cruisecontrolrb-developers at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers > > From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Tue Jul 28 07:19:40 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 04:19:40 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] master branch is badly broken since rails 2.3 branch merge In-Reply-To: References: <648eacf20907192333w72ce7f1ah9c6509862e3f4711@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I've fixed the problems (one was a non-issue), and closed the ticket. On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Brian Guthrie wrote: > Appreciate it Chad, I'll take a look. Many thanks to both you and > Jeremy for keeping the fire burning. > > Cheers, > > Brian > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Chad Woolley wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Chad Woolley >> wrote: >>> >>> Also, I just tried the fixes on the master branch, and they seem to work >>> with a couple of exceptions (I'll note on the tickets).? Thanks everyone! >> >> Here are the remaining issues I found, I opened a new ticket: >> >> https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150-cruise-control-rb/tickets/267-remaining-issues-with-rails-upgrade >> >> Assigned ticket to Brian, but let me know if you need help. >> >> Thanks, >> -- Chad >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list >> Cruisecontrolrb-developers at rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list > Cruisecontrolrb-developers at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers > From thewoolleyman at gmail.com Tue Jul 28 21:35:24 2009 From: thewoolleyman at gmail.com (Chad Woolley) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:35:24 -0700 Subject: [Cruisecontrolrb-developers] Help with Git hanging bugs Message-ID: We've taken a shot at fixing this with a timeout loop, but it still happens sometimes. It only happens in certain scenarios, and is hard (impossible for me so far) to reproduce. I've recorded the info I have in the comments of the ticket. Any help or further info is welcome: https://cruisecontrolrb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/9150/tickets/229-sometimes-git-hangs Thanks, -- Chad