Killing obsolete Jenkins builds
ashnakash at gmail.com
Wed Nov 18 19:20:03 PST 2015
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Norbert Thiebaud <nthiebaud at gmail.com>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Ashod Nakashian <ashnakash at gmail.com>
> > (Sorry if this has already been discussed/considered.)
> > Once a patch is pushed to Gerrit a Jenkins build automatically starts.
> > once subsequent patches are pushed the cycle repeats.
> > Is there a reason to keep running the builds of (old) patches that will
> > get cherry picked?
> Is there a reason to keep pushing these patches then ?
> Just stop building patch over patch and pushing them in bulk.. and
> make your patch independent of each other as much as possible.
Sorry, I didn't explain well.
The patches are related. They are updates based on feedback, partial
failure or improvement.
They aren't bulk pushes (whatever that means). They are updates on a single
Why do people send multiple patches per push? That's the right question to
And the answer is: to improve the previous patch.
Hence my question. If a patch has partially failed, or I got feedback to
improve it, or (insert reason here), and I want to push an update, why
should the previous patch still build when it's not necessary?
Hope this makes sense.
> iow: make a patch, push it to gerrit, come back to 'master' make
> another patch, push it to gerrit etc.
> and _not_
> make a patch, push it to gerrit
> git pull -r
> make another patch (on top of the non merged patch you just pushed to
> gerrit), push it to gerrit => both patch get rebuilt
Obviously I'm not doing that. Obviously.
> > To me it looks completely wasteful to spend hours building a few patches
> > that were pushed one after the other when only the last one is relevant.
> Then do not push new version of 'irrelevant' patches
> > Not
> > only it is wasteful to valuable shared resources, but the user is
> again, do not do that then.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the LibreOffice