1 |
On 01/10/2011 05:48 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: |
2 |
> Il giorno lun, 10/01/2011 alle 16.34 +0100, Luca Barbato ha scritto: |
3 |
>> |
4 |
>> Some options are either received them as email or make it show up |
5 |
>> through a website (like packages.g.o) |
6 |
> |
7 |
> One thing I'm going to make sure here is that we _will_ have a "push" |
8 |
> notification; a website one has to check is _not_ going to be the only |
9 |
> solution; we can add as many notifications we want but at least an email |
10 |
> has to go out. |
11 |
|
12 |
Agreed. |
13 |
|
14 |
> I for once usually don't keep many web pages open, but I always notice |
15 |
> email messages, and if we have a stable subject I'm going to put enough |
16 |
> priority on those that I can receive and act on them right as they |
17 |
> arrive, which is the main point of having this set up to be handled |
18 |
> automatically. |
19 |
|
20 |
I have serious problems with emails (I lose some when I get an |
21 |
overwhelming number of them in a short time due thunderbird not being |
22 |
able to cope with them partially) |
23 |
|
24 |
> Besides, I sincerely don't see how fate could scale well for this kind |
25 |
> of checks compared to the build checks ffmpeg runs. |
26 |
|
27 |
The fate structure is quite sound: |
28 |
|
29 |
- color code the situation (the bar on the top) |
30 |
- group the results (per arch, we could have also per herd) |
31 |
- give an aggregate view with ability to dig down |
32 |
|
33 |
So I'd copy it. |
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
|
37 |
Luca Barbato |
38 |
Gentoo/linux |
39 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |