Repeated 'PREPARE BUILD ERROR' notifications

[Wendy Smoak-3]

Since I can't take the Subversion repo down for testing, I've set up a
test project with an intentionally incorrect scm url to test how the
transient state notifications work.  I added the project to Continuum,
then added an email notifier with the 'Send on SCM Failure' box
checked.

I do _not_ have the 'Always send notfications' option enabled.

My expectation was that I'd get one notification of the scm error, and
then it would be quiet until something changed -- presumably someone
would fix the scm url, and I'd get a 'BUILD SUCCESSFUL' notification.

Instead, I'm getting a PREPARE BUILD ERROR notification every hour
when the scheduled build happens.

Is this working as designed?  I thought the transient state changes
were going to make it quieter when the scm repo is "down".

Thanks,
--
Wendy

[Marica Tan]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@...> wrote:

> Since I can't take the Subversion repo down for testing, I've set up a
> test project with an intentionally incorrect scm url to test how the
> transient state notifications work.  I added the project to Continuum,
> then added an email notifier with the 'Send on SCM Failure' box
> checked.
>
> I do _not_ have the 'Always send notfications' option enabled.
>
> My expectation was that I'd get one notification of the scm error, and
> then it would be quiet until something changed -- presumably someone
> would fix the scm url, and I'd get a 'BUILD SUCCESSFUL' notification.
>
> Instead, I'm getting a PREPARE BUILD ERROR notification every hour
> when the scheduled build happens.
>
> Is this working as designed?  I thought the transient state changes
> were going to make it quieter when the scm repo is "down".
>

Could you create a jira for this and you can assign it to me so we can
include this in 1.3.2.  Thanks Wendy!

--
Marica

[Wendy Smoak-3]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Marica Tan <ctan@...> wrote:

> Could you create a jira for this and you can assign it to me so we can
> include this in 1.3.2.  Thanks Wendy!

I've re-opened CONTINUUM-1823 which was originally closed as a
duplicate, and linked to this thread.

(I didn't schedule or assign it-- the behavior isn't any worse than
1.2.3, it's just not what I was expecting.)

--
Wendy