Should we send Travis messages to ghc-builds?

Hello everyone, While picking up the pieces from a failed merge today I realized that we currently spend a fair bit of carbon footprint and CPU cycles making Travis test GHC yet the results of these tests aren't pushed anywhere. Would anyone object to having Travis push notifications of changes in red/green state to ghc-builds@haskell.org? Perhaps this will allow some of us to react more quickly to regressions. Cheers, - Ben

Ben Gamari
[ Unknown signature status ]
Hello everyone,
While picking up the pieces from a failed merge today I realized that we currently spend a fair bit of carbon footprint and CPU cycles making Travis test GHC yet the results of these tests aren't pushed anywhere.
Would anyone object to having Travis push notifications of changes in red/green state to ghc-builds@haskell.org? Perhaps this will allow some of us to react more quickly to regressions.
Actually Thomas points out that we indeed used to do this and yet stopped because it meant that users would fork the repository, enable Travis build on their fork, and then inadvertantly spam the list. So, perhaps we shouldn't do this. - Ben

Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 21.07.2016, 00:15 +0200 schrieb Ben Gamari:
Ben Gamari
writes: [ Unknown signature status ]
Hello everyone,
While picking up the pieces from a failed merge today I realized that we currently spend a fair bit of carbon footprint and CPU cycles making Travis test GHC yet the results of these tests aren't pushed anywhere.
Would anyone object to having Travis push notifications of changes in red/green state to ghc-builds@haskell.org? Perhaps this will allow some of us to react more quickly to regressions.
Actually Thomas points out that we indeed used to do this and yet stopped because it meant that users would fork the repository, enable Travis build on their fork, and then inadvertantly spam the list. So, perhaps we shouldn't do this.
Yes, that is a problem. I still get failed build mails whenever Simon M. pushes to this 7.10.3-facebook branch. But should by default Travis notify the committer of a failed commit? Is that not sufficient? Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim “nomeata” Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de • https://www.joachim-breitner.de/ XMPP: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de • OpenPGP-Key: 0xF0FBF51F Debian Developer: nomeata@debian.org

On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 00:15 +0200, Ben Gamari wrote:
Ben Gamari
writes: [ Unknown signature status ]
Hello everyone,
While picking up the pieces from a failed merge today I realized that we currently spend a fair bit of carbon footprint and CPU cycles making Travis test GHC yet the results of these tests aren't pushed anywhere.
Would anyone object to having Travis push notifications of changes in red/green state to ghc-builds@haskell.org? Perhaps this will allow some of us to react more quickly to regressions.
Actually Thomas points out that we indeed used to do this and yet stopped because it meant that users would fork the repository, enable Travis build on their fork, and then inadvertantly spam the list. So, perhaps we shouldn't do this.
I think it could be controlled by an environment variable set in travis UI ( https://travis-ci.org/ghc/ghc/settings ). Repository fork will not clone the variables. Thanks, Yuras.
- Ben _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
participants (3)
-
Ben Gamari
-
Joachim Breitner
-
Yuras Shumovich