Flatpak 1.2 Likely Coming Around Year's End With New Features

[Weasel]

New post because last one had to be approved so you prolly didn't get notifications.

Short version: The testbot always runs against the "master branch". The "master branch" is what you get when you use git clone. Patches are NOT COMMITS, they do NOT become part of the master branch until they are committed (by Alexandre).

So just because you sent a patch, which did not get committed yet, and you sent another patch and the testbot used the "master branch" WITHOUT your first patch, does NOT mean the testbot doesn't run against the "master branch". Your confusion stems from the fact that you think patches sent in automatically update the "master branch" but that's retarded -- why would they even be patches then, just make them commits.

AFAIK only Alexandre has commit rights to the "master branch" so sending in a patch means nothing until he accepts it, which he does once per day except on weekend, and that is WHEN the "master branch" gets updated. Uncommitted patches are NOT part of the "master branch".


Speaking of which, no user has access to uncommitted patches even if they download the "master branch", unless they apply the patches themselves.

[oiaohm]

AFAIK only Alexandre has commit rights to the "master branch" so sending in a patch means nothing until he accepts it, which he does once per day except on weekend.

Except this is not true on the once per day bit.
http://test.winehq.org/data/ note Oct 03 and you can find other days where he has done that 3 to 4 times back though history. Alexandre push batches of patches to the master branch. Then decides if he wants the testbot to run over those patches before sending next batch. This is why you need to check head value against what testbot is tell you it tested with. It is possible that you have pulled from wine master while Alexandre is updating it and have pulled halfway though the application of patches.

The testbot always runs against the "master branch".

This is not true. Testbot runs with what ever branch Alexandre has told it to. This happens at times when there is a branch breakage that will be fixed by a latter patch at times as well.

The historic version of wine testbot use to only test patches after they were applied to master as a commit as it job was to detect master branch breakage. Altering around to testing patches before application does make sense. The big mistake you are making is thinking Alexandre updates master branch all the time as one big update. You will get caught pulling wine master branch from time to time and not checking the master head value against what testbot is showing because you will have pulled mid application of patches by Alexandre when he was considering if he was going to run testbot more than once that day. Yes he can change mind on that but if you have pull wine master and have not checked you end up being the one who sends in patches that come up with failed patch application because you have a branch mid update.

Yes mid update can be human error on Alexandre part where he has noticed I sent up that patch bundle missed a key patch. This is why it pays to have a master branch and a second area you update when everything else doubled checked. Gives a chance for those who know the system to see when human error has happened on master and avoid sending up invalid patch files and avoid attempting to build known broken by maintainer.

So master branch value of wine and what testbot is using is not 100 percent synced and it makes sense for it not to be and it Alexandre who sets sync he is not just in charge of master branch he has particular controls over the testing system..

Basically there is a form of race condition that can happen with the wine master branch. People do manage to find it.

https://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/shortlog/refs/heads/master

if you get here quick enough you will see a303f9cd101a to 3f4455c0f043650151873d899e6f7526b994fa93 (3.18)
You will notice that Alexandre sent the patches to master in 3 batches. If you catch the master mid Alexandre update of master you can be in trouble. Lot of sends to master are single batches but there are these big ones what can see master in git out of alignment with version testbot is using for quite a few hours.

Yes even that was 3 batches of patches to master the testbot is only touching the last one. So testbot and wine master is mostly aligned. But like in this recent case there was a 10 hour window when it was not. This are cases where I end up with people building from git master sometimes coming into #winehq on freenode asking what problem is.

This is why I tell those pulling from wine master to check version they have against testbot if it not matching the latest version on testbot wait a little bit. Under 12 hours it should get a testbot listed point.

Weasel what is the luck of it the problem I have been talking about about master going out of alignment with what testbot is using just happens to do it when we are talking about it. Its not exactly luck it in fact happens quite often. Maybe when you pull is mostly when Alexandre is not at work.

[Weasel]

Except this is not true on the once per day bit.
http://test.winehq.org/data/ note Oct 03 and you can find other days where he has done that 3 to 4 times back though history. Alexandre push batches of patches to the master branch. Then decides if he wants the testbot to run over those patches before sending next batch. This is why you need to check head value against what testbot is tell you it tested with. It is possible that you have pulled from wine master while Alexandre is updating it and have pulled halfway though the application of patches.

How many times must I tell you that page is just overview. As a developer, you get your testbot run when you send the patch, against the current "master branch". When you go git clone, you get the "master branch", and that's what the testbot runs against (after it applies your patch series, obviously). It doesn't matter how often Alexander pushes the patches to the "master branch" (yes in batch, I never claimed otherwise). What has that to do with the release schedule?!? Please.

This is not true. Testbot runs with what ever branch Alexandre has told it to. This happens at times when there is a branch breakage that will be fixed by a latter patch at times as well.

The historic version of wine testbot use to only test patches after they were applied to master as a commit as it job was to detect master branch breakage. Altering around to testing patches before application does make sense. The big mistake you are making is thinking Alexandre updates master branch all the time as one big update. You will get caught pulling wine master branch from time to time and not checking the master head value against what testbot is showing because you will have pulled mid application of patches by Alexandre when he was considering if he was going to run testbot more than once that day. Yes he can change mind on that but if you have pull wine master and have not checked you end up being the one who sends in patches that come up with failed patch application because you have a branch mid update.

Yes mid update can be human error on Alexandre part where he has noticed I sent up that patch bundle missed a key patch. This is why it pays to have a master branch and a second area you update when everything else doubled checked. Gives a chance for those who know the system to see when human error has happened on master and avoid sending up invalid patch files and avoid attempting to build known broken by maintainer.

So master branch value of wine and what testbot is using is not 100 percent synced and it makes sense for it not to be and it Alexandre who sets sync he is not just in charge of master branch he has particular controls over the testing system..

Basically there is a form of race condition that can happen with the wine master branch. People do manage to find it.

K, I've no idea what I read honestly. And I don't think you understand what a race condition is, either. If something is either updated or not updated, that's not a race condition.

It's only when it is partly updated, and I guess you need to supply some proof for that case. Cause I've never seen it happen yet.

Anyway, we're going off on a large tanget (like usual). What has this to do with the release schedule, again? You really love arguing about anything.