daily build mail subjects are very long / have db ids in them

[Robert Collins]

E.g. '[Build #2055709] i386 build of bzr-xmloutput 0.8.6+bzr148~ppa112+112~maverick1 in ubuntu maverick RELEASE (bzr-daily PPA) '

If its possible, making that a little pithier and relevant would be nice.

The build # doesn't seem useful as-is, and we link to it in the body anyway.
The exact package version number is perhaps useful but perhaps just the upstream & revno would be better.
Whether the build succeeded or failed *isn't* in the subject but its highly relevant.
The pocket isn't relevant for PPA builds.
All the ubuntu series names are unique amongst all the distros Launchpad builds for - perhaps we can drop the word 'ubuntu', at least unless/until we start actually building for non-ubuntu targets *in ppas*.

The most relevant information should be at the front I think - giving something like:
'build failure: bzr-xmloutput 0.8.6+bzr148~ppa112+112~maverick1 for maverick in ppa:bzr-daily'

[Martin Pool (mbp)]

On 21 November 2010 15:35, Robert Collins <email address hidden> wrote:

> Whether the build succeeded or failed *isn't* in the subject but its highly relevant.

I think there is already a Soyuz bug complaining about this.

--
Martin

[Aaron Bentley (abentley)]

The subject lines are the way they are because we were asked to make them that way in bug #603606

[Robert Collins (lifeless)]

Ugh, well I wouldn't want to end up with flipflopping bugs, but to
grab the points from that mail...

 * The subject doesn't tell you it is a recipe build.

  - I'm not sure why this matters? - and the current header doesn't
tell us that either.

 * the subject doesn't identify the recipe uniquely or the PPA. If you
have a lot of recipes this could get confusing

  - my proposed header does identify the PPA uniquely, and the package
+ PPA should tell folk what to look at, if they are uploading both
source packages and recipes to the same PPA with the same packagename
- well, gun, foot, trigger.

 * The body is rather terse and doesn't tell me much about what happened.

 - I'm totally fine with the body we have now.

 * It is needlessly incosistent with what you get for binary builds.

 - What we have for binary builds is pretty darn ugly too :)

What do you think? were my suggestions useful? Do you enjoy reading
recipe emails at the moment?

-Rob

[Aaron Bentley (abentley)]

I think you are looking at one of the build emails that we are not supposed to be sending at all. Those are uploader emails that are being mistakenly sent out for recipe builds. The subjects of recipe build mails do indicate that they are recipe builds, e.g. "[recipe build #8556] of ~abentley wakeonlan-lucid in natty: Chroot problem"