[Libreoffice-qa] Tinderbox builds

Pedro pedlino at gmail.com
Fri Nov 22 08:17:18 PST 2013

Hi Stuart

V Stuart Foote wrote
> Text file is not "needed"!  It is just convenient ;-)
> It is trivial to view the details of the TB builds of Master --
> http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org/MASTER/status.html  just  match the
> time-stamp of the build to the  "buld time" collumn and side across to the
> collumn for the TB your reviewing. The bottom of the corresponding block
> is the start of the build, and build logs are porvided in the details.
> Those are the exact details as get parsed for the "text" file.
> The details you shuld be interested in are the configuration line, to
> determine what features are included in the build, and SHA-1 HASH ID of
> the last commit included in the build, and maybe who is managing the TB --
> should you need to poke them.

That is partly true :) If you have downloaded a binary from one of the TB
and you don't have the txt file, how do you know from which TB it came from?

I know there is always a workaround. But isn't it easier to just have the
computer generate a simple txt file? If this functionality already exists
(and works as expected, as proven by TB #47) isn't it possible to adopt this
as a default procedure for all TBs?

V Stuart Foote wrote
> And functionally, for todays builds  of master TB-39 has the --enable-ia2
> build flag for IAccessible2 AT support, TB-42 and TB-47 do not.

Ok. But what is the difference between 42 and 47? Also, what should people
test in IA2? Is it on by default? Is there a hidden switch to turn it on?

This brings me back to the question: which build should users download? Is
testing IA2 important or are there  features in the builds from the other
TBs that are more crucial/urgent to test?


View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Tinderbox-builds-tp4083345p4084488.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list