[releng_4 tinderbox] failure on alpha/alpha

[Andy Sparrow]

> > The same thing started in -PORTS quite some time ago, where I find 
> > personally find that it generates more cr at p than the real traffic at 
> > times.
> 
> You're entitled to your opinion,

Thanks, I will clarify it further for you.

> but since you've never had to deal
> with the flood of support requests when INDEX builds were broken by
> careless committers before I started the automated tinderbox,

Wouldn't the real issue be to control the careless committers then? Or 
to target them specifically and directly with the Tinderbox failures?

When I automated overnight builds of mutiple branches of a commercial 
product on mutiple OS platforms, sending those build results 
company-wide was never considered as an option.

I just don't see why it isn't more appropriate to simply limit the 
messages to people with a commit bit, a specific email alias, or even 
people who checked stuff in since the last sucessful Tinderbox.

> I'd
> suggest you try to consider it from point of view of those of us who
> are actually involved in the support of the OS.

It's not that I don't appreciate the efforts that are being made so much 
as I question the elegance of the solution employed.

Some people pay for (limited) bandwidth by time on-line, and cannot 
filter except after receipt, thus have no choice but to *pay* to 
retrieve those messages before filtering them, so it's not simply a 
question of whether they "just hit delete" or filter them out or 
whatever.

Those messages thus inevitably dilute the value of the list for them, I 
suggest you try to consider it from *their* point of view.

There's also the issue that all the descriptive fields for -STABLE and 
-PORTS say that these are "discussion" lists - which *used* to be true. 
Multiple posts from Bots don't make for much of a "discussion", in my 
book.

Whatever. Procmail works for me, but not everyone has that choice.


AS