{5} Assigned, Active Tickets by Owner (Full Description) (17 matches)
anonymous (4 matches)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #273 | contrib/windows/setup.py does not create fully working buildbot_service.exe | other | 0.8.+ | defect | 05/13/08 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
While it creates working buildbot.exe, and the buildbot_serivce.exe works too. It can't start and gives the following traceback: BuildBot for directory u'c:\\buildbot' terminated with exit code 255. Traceback (most recent call last): File "boot_service.py", line 200, in <module> File "buildbot_service.pyc", line 502, in HandleCommandLine File "buildbot_service.pyc", line 482, in _RunChild File "os.pyc", line 444, in __delitem__ KeyError: 'PYTHONPATH' It looks like PYTHONPATH is not defined when running in py2exe env? (I don't know enough about py2exe to debug this currently) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #440 | py2exe buildbot.exe fails to find sample.cfg when creating new master | other | 0.8.+ | defect | 02/28/09 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Twofold:
I'll try to tackle it at the same time as #273. [edit: bug # fixed] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #1871 | Goofy quoting/space handling in buildbot_service.py | 0.8.+ | defect | 03/12/11 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If the slave directory has spaces in it, BB gets completely confused if following http://trac.buildbot.net/wiki/RunningBuildbotOnWindows It appears that the directory gets broken up on space boundaries, and if you explicitly add double-quotes to prevent that, the entire string (including quotes) is interpreted as a path _relative_ to buildbot's installation in site-packages/ That wiki page should include 2 prominent warnings about this pitfall until the actual problem is fixed. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #674 | Give better caching directives for static files in web interface | 0.9.+ | enhancement | 01/07/10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It looks like my web browser is requesting /default.css and /bg_gradient.jpg every single time I switch to a new page. Even if I use back and forward buttons, which don't cause the page to be requested again, it still requests again those two files. The requests properly use If-Modified-Since, and buildbot properly replies with 304 Not Modified, but it's still annoying. Clutters the webserver log, for one. According to redbot, the responses are “stale” as soon as they go out. They should have an appropriate Expires header, or Cache-Control: max-age=3600 (1 hour expiration from now). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ashcrow (1 match)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #356 | doxygen build step | other | 0.8.+ | enhancement | 09/24/08 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At one point I was using doxygen for documentation. While I'm not longer using it I figured the build step could be useful for others. Attached is the buildstep. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ayust (1 match)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #1827 | Make graceful shutdown a buildbot command | 0.8.+ | enhancement | 02/22/11 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Currently you can only do a graceful shutdown of the buildbot through the web status page. It would be nice to be able to do it through the command line too. Just like you can do a buildbot reconfig (if that fails you often want a graceful shutdown or even graceful restart to happen). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ddunbar (1 match)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #631 | IRC bot gives 'ValueError' when fed a singlequote | 0.8.+ | defect | 10/22/09 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Example: <neunon> CrawlBuild?, force build crawl-debug-x86_64-centos attempt to bomb with rvollmert's latest changes <CrawlBuild?> Something bad happened (see logs): <type 'exceptions.ValueError?'> Gives: 2009-10-22 00:45:22-0700 [IrcStatusBot?,client] irc command force 2009-10-22 00:45:22-0700 [IrcStatusBot?,client] Unhandled Error
Should I be reporting this to Twisted or can you guys work around this? And uh, it looks to me like this is a route to a security hole if it's not escaping the singlequote. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sridhar (1 match)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #301 | Allow a single buildslave to service multiple buildmasters | other | 2.0.+ | enhancement | 06/16/08 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
We run a few different buildmasters -- they're monitoring different repos, and in general are for different teams. But we use the same (large) set of build VMs for both. Currently we run two buildslave instances on each build VM, which is inefficient in a few ways: it's a lot of duplicated data in RAM, since Python bytecode isn't shared the way .so's are; and it means that builds for two different projects can be taking place simultaneously on the same VM. It would be nice to have the option of pointing a single buildslave at multiple buildmasters, with some sort of locking to only allow it to run a single build at a time. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
toinbis (5 matches)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #174 | Persist ETA data across restarts | other | 0.9.+ | enhancement | 01/28/08 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Currently Buildbot forgets the historical data it needs to compute ETA whenever it's restarted or (I think) reconfigured. According to Brian Warner in a buildbot-dev posting, this should not be too hard to fix:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #738 | Record true start/end time for build steps | 0.8.+ | enhancement | 03/10/10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Buildbot currently records the start/end time for steps on the master. This means that end time of step N is always the same as the start time of step N+1. When master load is high, the latency between a slave actually finishing a command and receiving the next one can be significant. One idea is to have the slaves record the command start time internally, and then when the command is done, send the slave start/end time to the master. The master would use its version of the start time as the step start time, and then calculate the delta between slave start time as master start time as clock scew/network latency and add it to the slave's end time. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #795 | Allow switching ETA estimation method in master.cfg | 0.8.+ | enhancement | 04/13/10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current ETA calculation scheme "If there are any metrics, use text-output based estimation, otherwise, fall back to time-based estimation" is not transparent at all. Some users might prefer the current "mix", while others would prefer to stick with time-only estimations, while even others probably would prefer what is described by Brian in http://buildbot.net/trac/ticket/540 etc. Maybe It'd be a good idea to introduce some scheme for letting Buildbot users to choose which type of estimation method they prefer and Buildbot Developers to add new ways of calculating/estimating ETA easily. How could this be done? The first though crossing my mind on how to implement this scheme is an optional setting in master.cfg, allowing user to choose default ETA calculation/estimation setting. And probably an optional step's parameter, allowing to override the default setting. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #796 | Implement UI elements: build's progress bar & build time charts | 0.8.+ | enhancement | 04/13/10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Couple of UI elements could be implemented in order to make buildbot's webstatus pages be more intuitively-informative: a) build's progress bar. A graphical representation for the build's ETA time. b) build's timing chart, probably with distinct type(colour) of lines representing each step. jQuery(UI) + Plot( http://code.google.com/p/flot/) are the tools to be used initially, whilst having eyes wide open for the more appropriate ones (more possible options are described here: http://www.reynoldsftw.com/2009/02/6-jquery-chart-plugins-reviewed/). These improvements shouldn't affect the way JS-less browsers renders web status pages. External loading of JS libraries and/or caching should be considered to reduce an extra load of buildmaster. But that's already the scope of another ticket. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #149 | addLogObserver and progressMetrics | configuration | 2.0.+ | enhancement | 12/10/07 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Warner wrote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
unpaidbill (1 match)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #678 | Allow CVS checkout/export of multiple modules | 0.8.+ | enhancement | 01/12/10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The standard CVS checkout/export syntax allows not just one, but multiple, modules to be checked out/exported, see http://www.cs.utah.edu/dept/old/texinfo/cvs/cvs_18.html#SEC73 . I had a clear requirement to do just this in my buildbot, and doing multiple separate source.CVS() calls for each module did not seem to work well due to purging of directories. Therefore, I propose that the cvsmodule parameter of source.CVS() be generalised to accept a list of module path strings in addition to just a single string as at present; all the specified modules would be checked out/exported at once. I have implemented this functionality on my buildbot system in just a couple of lines of code, and it works perfectly. Note that in this scenario one would normally expect to use the additional (currently undocumented) parameter checkout_options=['-N'] to ensure that the full directory tree was retained for each module and the multiple checkouts/exports did not end up on top of each other. If this proposal is acceptable, I am happy to push up the change and updated documentation. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
warner (3 matches)
| Ticket | Summary | Component | Milestone | Type | Created | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #68 | New mechanism for monitoring buildbot startup | configuration | 0.8.+ | defect | 07/31/07 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The buildbot slave default timeout can be too short for us. Sometimes, 5sec isnt always enough, and we get following: % cltbld$ buildbot start /Users/cltbld/macosx-slave1
% ... even though slave started "normally", responds fine to pings from buildbot master, and does handle jobs just fine. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #540 | overhaul ETA calculation | other | 0.8.+ | enhancement | 03/31/09 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Progress and Expectation classes are overdue for a rewrite. They need to move to a scheme that I'll call Reverse Temporal Mapping because it sounds clever. The idea is that each StepProgress? metric (an axis along which progress can be measured, like bytes of output or test cases run) should be sampled periodically during the Step. Nominally we'd like about 100 samples total, but if we have no idea how long the step will run then we can just sample every 10 seconds or something. Those samples form a graph of progress-versus-time. We then invert the graph to give us one of time-versus-progress. This is used to create an interpolation table that will map from progress values into elapsed seconds. During the next build, we'll take the current progress value and use this table to estimate how many seconds are left to go. The tables should be averaged over multiple builds, to provide some smoothing. The ETA values from the various metrics should be combined with some sort of weighted average (some metrics may be more accurate than others). We also need to handle overdue builds better. It may be useful to report both the ETA and the percentage complete (since a slow build that still produces the same output as before will show <%100 complete even when the build is overdue). It would also be useful to add some intstrumentation that lets us check the accurary of the ETA code, perhaps a table to show how the ETA changes as the build runs, comparing it to the actual elapsed time. The ETA should get more accurate as the build nears completion: it would be nice to see a graph of this convergence. Submitted: Brian Warner ( warner ) - 2005-05-18 05:19 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| #24 | save build status in an SQL database | statusplugins | 0.9.0 | enhancement | 02/18/07 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Some things would be made easier if we were to store build status in a database that could be read by other processes. SQLite would be a good starting point. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![[Buildbot Logo]](/chrome/site/header-text-transparent.png)