From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f47.google.com (mail-wg0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEB04208AAA for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 03:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wgbfa7 with SMTP id fa7so4656545wgb.28 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 03:58:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=vcpQgOiCE41UirN8g0whPyBBAQ2B3+glgizuuGmlnxI=; b=DmfDJCyz6YwLYGo2QYmif4DY1SCbIHJq9Sa/Pf21sjLk8wwQTUPpqA+5yGFFtyOOJF m9AhDgfIYe6ZRgKzWgwudl9hIAUn0VnhqNXo+j050tr+3CJJ3ZLYuOMnlhsIuG6JkFOI Yz0nrf6lj1Y922pJT/kKiWAAfAZ6OTo2grv1KuX0z4/Fn7PXwUSnMvzNhI2wbijSuTDq 4v24qNQctawyDje8r+ff8XnyqU9q5yHTi8G5L+KSnhns3PTTLgTvJdtzFZYKbL7qvW+B Y4UOWSrIP12FE8Fz6yk2iuv6xWa4hjln4rw6PZ3lmRhat8RtkRhmlKjaU6NGktwuRcTm WTnA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.80.22 with SMTP id j22mr10577075wee.198.1340103538122; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 03:58:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.76.24 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 03:58:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [213.189.36.98] In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 12:58:58 +0200 Message-ID: From: Maciej Soltysiak To: Dave Taht Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f6288c5a217304c2d12b05 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnwHnzA5PDpYPOtz9rY8uXNLXYFpmsPK8c1iqvbdZtLc7tXNYpDWlF8q/FhL+PozoabNIZi Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] no 3.3.8-4 yet X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 10:59:01 -0000 --001485f6288c5a217304c2d12b05 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Dave, About crystalizing dev builds. I think we could have a small set of conditions for clear "dev" builds, say: "at least 4 out of 5 dedicated testers reporting they could run it for at least 48 hours without crashes, unplanned reboots or unexpected network behaviour". You could setup a recurring meeting in our calendars to put in place something like this: a) you build on every 4th thursday b) testers fetch/install next friday c) testers run it for the weekend d) testers report on Monday e) dave decides wheter to make it a solid dev build or not. I can be a tester, I've been using various builds for some time now, they really work for me. One positive comment on functionality: I no longer have to IPTABLES -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT to allow my wired TV to discover my wireless media server client and DLNA works OK. (I know, it's a lazy/insecure way of fixing it) All the best! Maciej On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > One thing that might work better from my perspective is breaking > things into a string of "dev" releases and then trying to do CI on > them more automatedly without any testing by me. > > ...except when I break the package db with the new opkg support, and > the fw rules aren't forwarding right right now > > I really hate to waste other people's time with stuff that is entirely > untested however. My overall policy has been to integrate the release, > adding new features, bug fixes, etc, then testing for at least 24 > hours on several routers including my main one, then do an > announcement that it was "safe" to try it, with what the new features > are. Lately people have been beating me to the announcements... > > That said, cutting that cycle down would speed matters up and reduce > my workload. I feel that if I establish a clear "dev" vs "somewhat > safe for real use" set of builds things would go faster for everyone, > and those that really want to be on the utterly bleeding edge can be. > > Does that work? > > > > -- > > Dave T=C3=A4ht > > SKYPE: davetaht > > http://ronsravings.blogspot.com/ > > > > -- > Dave T=C3=A4ht > SKYPE: davetaht > http://ronsravings.blogspot.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > --001485f6288c5a217304c2d12b05 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Dave,
=C2=A0
About crystalizing dev builds. I think we could have a small set of co= nditions for clear "dev" builds, say:
"at least=C2=A04 out of 5=C2=A0dedicated testers reporting they c= ould run it for=C2=A0at least 48 hours without crashes, unplanned reboots o= r unexpected network behaviour".
=C2=A0
You could setup a recurring meeting in our calendars to put in place s= omething like this:
a) you build on every 4th thursday
b) testers fetch/install next friday
c) testers run it for the weekend
d) testers report on Monday
e) dave decides wheter to make it a solid dev build or not.
=C2=A0
I can be a tester, I've been using various builds for some time no= w, they really work for me.
=C2=A0
One positive comment on functionality:
=C2=A0
I no longer have to IPTABLES -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT to allow my wired TV= to discover my wireless media server client and DLNA works OK. (I know, it= 's a lazy/insecure way of fixing it)
All the best!
Maciej
=C2=A0
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Dave Taht <d= ave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
One thing that might work better from= my perspective is breaking
things into a string of "dev" rele= ases and then trying to do CI on
them more automatedly without any testing by me.

...except when I br= eak the package db with the new opkg support, and
the fw rules aren'= t forwarding right right now

I really hate to waste other people'= ;s time with stuff that is entirely
untested however. My overall policy has been to integrate the release,
a= dding new features, bug fixes, etc, then testing for at least 24
hours o= n several routers including my main one, then do an
announcement that it= was "safe" to try it, with what the new features
are. Lately people have been beating me to the announcements...

That= said, cutting that cycle down would speed matters up and reduce
my work= load. =C2=A0I feel that if I establish a clear "dev" vs "som= ewhat
safe for real use" set of builds things would go faster for everyone,<= br>and those that really want to be on the utterly bleeding edge can be.
Does that work?


> --
> Dave T=C3=A4ht
> SKYPE: dav= etaht
> http://ronsravings.blogspot.com/



--
Dave T=C3=A4ht<= br>SKYPE: davetaht
http://ronsr= avings.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________=
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
<= /div>

--001485f6288c5a217304c2d12b05--