/builders does not indicate problem builds in any way
Bug #561383 reported by
Julian Edwards
This bug affects 2 people
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Launchpad itself |
Triaged
|
Low
|
Unassigned | ||
Bug Description
Folk looking at /builders cannot tell if a build is in trouble or not: some builds routinely take days, others should take mere minutes. Launchpad knows how long the builds took.
The /builders page could help with this assessment if it flagged up builds taking a long time:
1) If the package previously built OK and this build is taking more than 50% longer to build
2) If the package is new, but has taken longer than one day
Comments welcome on how best to highlight the slow builds.
| Changed in soyuz: | |
| status: | New → Triaged |
| importance: | Undecided → High |
| milestone: | none → pending |
| tags: | added: buildfarm |
| tags: | added: buildd-manager |
| tags: |
added: ui removed: buildd-manager |
Revision history for this message
| Michael Nelson (michael.nelson) wrote | #1 |
Revision history for this message
| Robert Collins (lifeless) wrote | #2 |
| summary: |
- /builders should highlight builds that have taken a long time + /builders does not indicate problem builds in any way |
| description: | updated |
| Changed in launchpad: | |
| importance: | High → Low |
To post a comment you must log in.
From a UI pov, I think this would just require a view method is_long_build and then
1) setting a class on the row for builds where is_long_build is true, and
2) Adding some text after the build title, similar to "This build is taking longer than expected."
If more textual info would be better, we could instead have the view property: long_build_
The row class could then be styled in the same way that we style out-of-date packages in PPAs. We should standardise on a class name such as 'highlight' and then style tr.highlight for highlighting rows on both pages.