[cfe-dev] LLVM IRC channel flooded?

Jonathan Roelofs jonathan at codesourcery.com
Tue May 19 10:42:02 PDT 2015

On 5/19/15 11:28 AM, Chris Matthews wrote:
> If “flooding” is the issue, the only long term solution is to A) have
> a bot channel that can be flooded or B) curate the list of bots which
> notify IRC.

Realistically, who is going to subscribe to such a bot channel in (A)? I 
probably wouldn't. The point is to tame the noise, not hide it.

(B) sounds useful regardless.

> A more fun solution would be to have the bots implement a first
> failure policy for notifications.  We move the bots to their own
> channel, then have an IRC bot watch that channel for failures, parse
> the rev, and only notify if it is the first to find a failure at that
> rev.


> I agree that long blame lists are useless and should be removed. URL
> shortening would add a dependence on an external service which is a
> new source of failure and trust.

It doesn't have to be an external service...


Isn't /so/ bad, and is leaps & bounds better than the existing URLs. 
Granted, then maintaining that services becomes our problem as a community.


>> On May 19, 2015, at 9:50 AM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com>
>> wrote:
>> Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> writes:
>>> On 5/19/15 8:58 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
>>>> On 19 May 2015 at 15:48, Jonathan Roelofs
>>>> <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote:
>>>>> Also, perhaps the URLs should be shortened?
>>>> That's a good idea.
>>>>> The format could be: [botname]: [buildername] [short_url]
>>>>> ("Passed"|"Failed:" [usernames])
>>>> The only reason to show "Passed" results is if they were
>>>> failing before, as a confirmation that whatever you did to fix,
>>>> worked. Otherwise, they're just noise.
>>> Good point.
>>> [botname]: [buildername] [short_url] [revision]
>>> ("Fixed:"|"FAILED:") [usernames]
>> Most (I thought all) of the bots already do the fixed failed
>> thing. There's something to be said for a consistent format though,
>> and it'd be nice if more of the bots mentioned the revision
>> (green-dragon does, but llvmbb and bb-chapuni don't).
>> The other thing that would help is limiting the number of names
>> that can show up on a blamelist. If there are a hundred names on
>> the blamelist the message is way too long and the notifications
>> don't help much. The green-dragon bot just says "[n] people on
>> blamelist" instead in these cases.
>>> Should the bots blame people for fixes?
>> I don't think so - if you fixed it intentionally you usually know
>> it, and if not it's just another beeping window to ignore.
>> _______________________________________________ cfe-dev mailing
>> list cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

Jon Roelofs
jonathan at codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded

More information about the cfe-dev mailing list