On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:00 PM, James Westby <email address hidden>wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:20:49 -0000, Frans Gifford <
> <email address hidden>> wrote:
> > Public bug reported:
> >
> > For example in https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-
> > android/panda/#build=270
> >
> > Failure to connect to LAVA is annoying, but shouldn't cause the build to
> > be marked as failed.
>
>
>
If it doesn't fail the build is there a danger that no-one will notice
> that builds aren't being tested?
>
>
My take on this is that as long as the artifacts still come out it's ok to
mark the build as FAILED. Why would there be any problem with that?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:00 PM, James Westby <email address hidden>wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:20:49 -0000, Frans Gifford < /android- build.linaro. org/builds/ ~linaro- panda/# build=270
> <email address hidden>> wrote:
> > Public bug reported:
> >
> > For example in https:/
> > android/
> >
> > Failure to connect to LAVA is annoying, but shouldn't cause the build to
> > be marked as failed.
>
>
>
If it doesn't fail the build is there a danger that no-one will notice
> that builds aren't being tested?
>
>
My take on this is that as long as the artifacts still come out it's ok to
mark the build as FAILED. Why would there be any problem with that?
--
- Alexander