[webkit-dev] Frustrated at inconsiderate behavior

[Adam Barth]

Sorry for singling you out Alexey.  I was just frustrated last night.

On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov <ap at webkit.org> wrote:
> 07.07.2010, в 00:47, Adam Barth написал(а):
>> If you're tired of my complaining about the tree being red, you can
>> skip this message.
>
> I understand that you're frustrated, but I think that you're misinterpreting what happened.
>
>> 1) He could have run-webkit-tests before committing his change.
>
> I did that. I made the mistake of running a wrong subset though (forgot that local xmlhttprequest tests were no longer in fast/dom).

Maybe the root cause here is that the test suite takes too long to
run?  We can make run-webkit-tests faster...

>> 2) If he didn't have time to run the tests locally, he could have used
>> the commit-queue to run-webkit-tests before it landed his patch.
>
> Using commit-queue while it still doesn't provide correct svn blame is trading short term problems for longer term ones. Yes, one can still open a changeset by number, but having names really helps read svn blame.

This problem is now fixed thanks to William Siegrist.  Patches written
by committers show up correctly in SVN blame and trac even if they're
landed by the commit-queue.

>> 3) He could have looked at the tree when sheriff-bot informed him that
>> he might have broken Leopard Intel Debug by pinging him in #webkit and
>> commenting on his bug:
>> <https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41156#c8>.
>
> I worked with Qt guys on fixing tests on Qt, and I watched the tree, which didn't show any sign of a problem from my patch at the time. Perhaps I'm starting to rely on sheriff bot too much - it didn't complain about any platforms besides Leopard Intel Debug.

It only complains once to avoid spamming when it makes a mistake.

> Leopard builder was seriously broken yesterday, so I didn't pay attention when it complained about a problem many hours later. In retrospect, that was a mistake.

I think we can improve this by having sheriff-bot say which tests
broke.  I bet if you saw these tests listed, you'd have realized what
was going one.

>> these failures remained in the tree until I cleaned them up
>
> I see that Tiger bot still has a unique failure, and will investigate it as soon as possible.

Thanks.

Adam