Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:73704 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 40773 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2014 16:53:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Apr 2014 16:53:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 108.166.43.123 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 108.166.43.123 smtp123.ord1c.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [108.166.43.123] ([108.166.43.123:34271] helo=smtp123.ord1c.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 03/81-30922-0246D435 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:53:52 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp8.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 57E581A075A; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:53:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp8.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 089971A13E8; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:53:49 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <534D641D.9060104@sugarcrm.com> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:53:49 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julien Pauli CC: PHP Internals References: <534C2133.8010402@sugarcrm.com> <534D5F7F.5080604@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] keeping unit tests green From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > In fact, if we could add more analyze tools, it would be nice, because > actually, it just acts as an autommated "make test". Yes, for now. We can definitely expand it. Only downside of simplicity is that we have basic yes/no trigger and build artifacts are only available as a log AFAIK. So for some tools it may not be the best and Jenkins (which has more extensive reporting and build artifacts support) could be better. But suggestions of course are most welcome, and we can put anything we want in .travis.yml if Travis supports it. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227