headers
William Deegan | 1 Apr 2011 01:27
Gravatar

Re: messageFormatter which includes last 50 lines from log file is including < 50 lines when the log file is 77 lines

Amber,

Thanks.
I'll give that a shot.
The len(content)-limit_lines is in the example in the buildbot user manual.

Should I file a bug on the manual?

-Bill
On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Amber Yust wrote:

content[len(content)-limit_lines:]
should just be

content[-limit_lines:]

~Amber

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:23 PM, William Deegan <bill-cJFiu+DHMVC5azolltMz9laTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
content[len(content)-limit_lines:]:


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf

_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Amber Yust | 1 Apr 2011 01:30
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: messageFormatter which includes last 50 lines from log file is including < 50 lines when the log file is 77 lines

Potentially, or even better a patch. If you do file a ticket, feel free to assign it to me (ayust).

~Amber (sent from Droid, please forgive any typos!)

On Mar 31, 2011 4:28 PM, "William Deegan" <bill <at> baddogconsulting.com> wrote:
> Amber,
>
> Thanks.
> I'll give that a shot.
> The len(content)-limit_lines is in the example in the buildbot user manual.
>
> Should I file a bug on the manual?
>
> -Bill
> On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Amber Yust wrote:
>
>> content[len(content)-limit_lines:]
>>
>> should just be
>>
>> content[-limit_lines:]
>>
>> ~Amber
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:23 PM, William Deegan <bill <at> baddogconsulting.com> wrote:
>> content[len(content)-limit_lines:]:
>>
> 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf

_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Doug Latornell | 1 Apr 2011 07:13
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: try command options code questions

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Dustin J. Mitchell <dustin <at> v.igoro.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Tom Prince <tom.prince@...> wrote:
>>> It would return the command line or option file value of username or
>>> "try_username" as the default, wouldn't it? Or am I missing something?
>>
>> I haven't checked the code, but your reasoning sound correct.
>
> You're both right.  This has been my "canary in the coal mine" to see
> if anyone's really using the try functionality.  Congratulations,
> you've discovered the dead canary!

So, essentially, you were trolling for maintainers.. :-)  We're not
supposed to feed the trolls, are we, but I guess I'll make an
exception in this case...

> This should be relatively easy to fix, and I'd love to have a patch
> for it.

I just sent a pull request.

> Even better, I'd love to have a name to put into
> MAINTAINERS.txt, for someone I can contact to tackle bugs, review
> patches, etc.

Yeah, okay, I'll sign up for that. But Tom is getting way deeper into
try than I am, so I'd be really happy if he'd agree to be a maintainer
too.

Doug

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Doug Latornell | 1 Apr 2011 07:28
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: try command options code questions

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Tom Prince <tom.prince@...> wrote:
> On 2011-03-30, Doug Latornell wrote:
>> I'm finally getting some time in on trying to clean up the buildbot
>> try command line options and their .buildbot/options file
>> counterparts.
>
> I was looking at something related recently. I wrote some code
> https://github.com/tomprince/buildbot/tree/try-repo
> recently to allow passing a repository option to try. I also looked and
> adding smarts to detect the correct git repository to use.
> https://github.com/tomprince/buildbot/tree/try-repo-hack
>
> The issue that I ran into is that there are to views one can take with a
> DVCS (in particular git). On can talk about local branches, or local
> names for remote branches, and local names for remote repositories. But
> one can also talk about remote branches and remote repositories
> directly.
> ...

I hadn't thought about the implication of DCVS for try. I'm not really
using try for it's intended purpose, but rather as a sort of side-door
to trigger a group of special build that need to be run from time to
time to produce reference data files for the regular builds.

The itch I set out to scratch arises from the fact that I started
running the buildmaster in a virtualenv. If I issue a buildbot try
command via ssh I need to specify the buildbot executable to be used.
So, I want something similar to the hg --remotecmd option. I had
thought of calling it --remotecmd too, but perhaps something like
--buildbotbin would be more appropriate. Anyway, when I proposed it to
this list a few month ago, Dustin came back with the challenge to make
the try options more consistent, and improve their documentation, and
I decided to take that on while I was at it. So, that's what I'm
working on in my
https://github.com/douglatornell/buildbot/tree/tryfixes branch.

Doug

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Fulvio Cervone | 1 Apr 2011 10:14

trigger a builder from another builder: a bit of confusion

Buildbot users/devs,

I am planning to create a builder that will be triggered by a step in another builder...but i am not getting
the logic right, so before writing code i would like to know how to get this right from the design perspective.

I have 3 builders:

A that build
B that test
C that update tools

and a factory for each of them (fA, fB and fC)

each builder has a scheduler set (sA,and sB runs every hour, sC every 8 hours)

now i would like to add a check on C, so if there are certain conditions it will be triggered, so i planned to
introduce builder D, that will check and trigger C if the conditions are satisfied.

Looking at the triggerable steps and builders, I get that i have to create a triggerable builder, so I made 

Builder D, that has the factory fD(that will run the steps to check if C should be run or not)

and the scheduler sD (triggerable that is pointing to the builder C)

Now where should i put the trigger step? From what I understand it should go in fD, right after the step to
check if C should be run or not.

Is this correct or did I got it all wrong ?

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Axel Hecht | 1 Apr 2011 12:55

Re: trigger a builder from another builder: a bit of confusion

C should be the triggerable, and the trigger step is in D.

Now, I'm a tad confused about your setup at large. What people usually do is

Build A on changes to the source code.

If A succeeds, do tests, aka, add a trigger step to A, kicking off a triggerable B.

Not sure why you're running C less frequently, but you could possibly just trigger it from B, if your tests pass.

Axel

2011/4/1 Fulvio Cervone <fcervone-BUHhN+a2lJ4@public.gmane.org>
Buildbot users/devs,

I am planning to create a builder that will be triggered by a step in another builder...but i am not getting the logic right, so before writing code i would like to know how to get this right from the design perspective.

I have 3 builders:

A that build
B that test
C that update tools

and a factory for each of them (fA, fB and fC)

each builder has a scheduler set (sA,and sB runs every hour, sC every 8 hours)

now i would like to add a check on C, so if there are certain conditions it will be triggered, so i planned to introduce builder D, that will check and trigger C if the conditions are satisfied.

Looking at the triggerable steps and builders, I get that i have to create a triggerable builder, so I made

Builder D, that has the factory fD(that will run the steps to check if C should be run or not)

and the scheduler sD (triggerable that is pointing to the builder C)

Now where should i put the trigger step? From what I understand it should go in fD, right after the step to check if C should be run or not.

Is this correct or did I got it all wrong ?

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself;
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel <at> lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf

_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Fulvio Cervone | 1 Apr 2011 21:16

Re: trigger a builder from another builder: a bit of confusion

Thanks Axel

Indeed my setup is much more like  a stripped down setup; was not useful to add complexity while I was trying to understand the setup from the design point of view, so I just oversimplified the setup to get it right.

I tried it and it works fine; I just wish that i would be able to not have the previous step to fail and halt the builder, to avoid to run always the trigger even when i do not need it (something like if the check step is not successful I would like to halt the build and show a warning instead, but so far was not able to find a way to achieve this, so i just keep in mind that it is not a failure when the check step fail, and the whole check builder fails).

I will also add the triggerable to B, so i can kick the tests if needed (my build process is kinda messy, so i do not need the tests all the times)

Thanks for the clarification!


On Apr 1, 2011, at 3:55 AM, Axel Hecht wrote:

C should be the triggerable, and the trigger step is in D.

Now, I'm a tad confused about your setup at large. What people usually do is

Build A on changes to the source code.

If A succeeds, do tests, aka, add a trigger step to A, kicking off a triggerable B.

Not sure why you're running C less frequently, but you could possibly just trigger it from B, if your tests pass.

Axel

2011/4/1 Fulvio Cervone <fcervone-BUHhN+a2lJ4@public.gmane.org>
Buildbot users/devs,

I am planning to create a builder that will be triggered by a step in another builder...but i am not getting the logic right, so before writing code i would like to know how to get this right from the design perspective.

I have 3 builders:

A that build
B that test
C that update tools

and a factory for each of them (fA, fB and fC)

each builder has a scheduler set (sA,and sB runs every hour, sC every 8 hours)

now i would like to add a check on C, so if there are certain conditions it will be triggered, so i planned to introduce builder D, that will check and trigger C if the conditions are satisfied.

Looking at the triggerable steps and builders, I get that i have to create a triggerable builder, so I made

Builder D, that has the factory fD(that will run the steps to check if C should be run or not)

and the scheduler sD (triggerable that is pointing to the builder C)

Now where should i put the trigger step? From what I understand it should go in fD, right after the step to check if C should be run or not.

Is this correct or did I got it all wrong ?

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself;
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel <at> lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf

_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Axel Hecht | 2 Apr 2011 01:01

Re: trigger a builder from another builder: a bit of confusion

If you only want to trigger under some condition, have a look at doStepIf in http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/0.8.3/Common-Parameters.html#Common-Parameters, that might be useful.

Axel

2011/4/1 Fulvio Cervone <fcervone-BUHhN+a2lJ4@public.gmane.org>
Thanks Axel

Indeed my setup is much more like  a stripped down setup; was not useful to add complexity while I was trying to understand the setup from the design point of view, so I just oversimplified the setup to get it right.

I tried it and it works fine; I just wish that i would be able to not have the previous step to fail and halt the builder, to avoid to run always the trigger even when i do not need it (something like if the check step is not successful I would like to halt the build and show a warning instead, but so far was not able to find a way to achieve this, so i just keep in mind that it is not a failure when the check step fail, and the whole check builder fails).

I will also add the triggerable to B, so i can kick the tests if needed (my build process is kinda messy, so i do not need the tests all the times)

Thanks for the clarification!


On Apr 1, 2011, at 3:55 AM, Axel Hecht wrote:

C should be the triggerable, and the trigger step is in D.

Now, I'm a tad confused about your setup at large. What people usually do is

Build A on changes to the source code.

If A succeeds, do tests, aka, add a trigger step to A, kicking off a triggerable B.

Not sure why you're running C less frequently, but you could possibly just trigger it from B, if your tests pass.

Axel

2011/4/1 Fulvio Cervone <fcervone-BUHhN+a2lJ4@public.gmane.org>
Buildbot users/devs,

I am planning to create a builder that will be triggered by a step in another builder...but i am not getting the logic right, so before writing code i would like to know how to get this right from the design perspective.

I have 3 builders:

A that build
B that test
C that update tools

and a factory for each of them (fA, fB and fC)

each builder has a scheduler set (sA,and sB runs every hour, sC every 8 hours)

now i would like to add a check on C, so if there are certain conditions it will be triggered, so i planned to introduce builder D, that will check and trigger C if the conditions are satisfied.

Looking at the triggerable steps and builders, I get that i have to create a triggerable builder, so I made

Builder D, that has the factory fD(that will run the steps to check if C should be run or not)

and the scheduler sD (triggerable that is pointing to the builder C)

Now where should i put the trigger step? From what I understand it should go in fD, right after the step to check if C should be run or not.

Is this correct or did I got it all wrong ?

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself;
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf

_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Fulvio Cervone | 2 Apr 2011 01:05

Re: trigger a builder from another builder: a bit of confusion


I will probably go for that way; seems much more easier to implement :)

Thanks!


On Apr 1, 2011, at 4:01 PM, Axel Hecht wrote:

If you only want to trigger under some condition, have a look at doStepIf in http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/0.8.3/Common-Parameters.html#Common-Parameters, that might be useful.

Axel

2011/4/1 Fulvio Cervone <fcervone-BUHhN+a2lJ4@public.gmane.org>
Thanks Axel

Indeed my setup is much more like  a stripped down setup; was not useful to add complexity while I was trying to understand the setup from the design point of view, so I just oversimplified the setup to get it right.

I tried it and it works fine; I just wish that i would be able to not have the previous step to fail and halt the builder, to avoid to run always the trigger even when i do not need it (something like if the check step is not successful I would like to halt the build and show a warning instead, but so far was not able to find a way to achieve this, so i just keep in mind that it is not a failure when the check step fail, and the whole check builder fails).

I will also add the triggerable to B, so i can kick the tests if needed (my build process is kinda messy, so i do not need the tests all the times)

Thanks for the clarification!


On Apr 1, 2011, at 3:55 AM, Axel Hecht wrote:

C should be the triggerable, and the trigger step is in D.

Now, I'm a tad confused about your setup at large. What people usually do is

Build A on changes to the source code.

If A succeeds, do tests, aka, add a trigger step to A, kicking off a triggerable B.

Not sure why you're running C less frequently, but you could possibly just trigger it from B, if your tests pass.

Axel

2011/4/1 Fulvio Cervone <fcervone-BUHhN+a2lJ4@public.gmane.org>
Buildbot users/devs,

I am planning to create a builder that will be triggered by a step in another builder...but i am not getting the logic right, so before writing code i would like to know how to get this right from the design perspective.

I have 3 builders:

A that build
B that test
C that update tools

and a factory for each of them (fA, fB and fC)

each builder has a scheduler set (sA,and sB runs every hour, sC every 8 hours)

now i would like to add a check on C, so if there are certain conditions it will be triggered, so i planned to introduce builder D, that will check and trigger C if the conditions are satisfied.

Looking at the triggerable steps and builders, I get that i have to create a triggerable builder, so I made

Builder D, that has the factory fD(that will run the steps to check if C should be run or not)

and the scheduler sD (triggerable that is pointing to the builder C)

Now where should i put the trigger step? From what I understand it should go in fD, right after the step to check if C should be run or not.

Is this correct or did I got it all wrong ?

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself;
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf

_______________________________________________
Buildbot-devel mailing list
Buildbot-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Pradeepkumar Gayam | 3 Apr 2011 09:57
Picon

GSoC Proposal (draft) : Consistent, Efficient Source Steps


-- 
GSoC Proposal (draft) : Consistent, Efficient Source Steps

:author: Pradeepkumar Gayam

.. topic:: Abstract

    Consistent, Efficient Source Steps. Currently to make different kind of
    builds, for example complete or incremental build we set different modes.
    But these modes doesn't match the users requirement. For that modes should
    have the facility to specify what exactly user want to do.

Outline of this proposal
========================

This section provides the outline of proposal, doesn't contain any
description. I listed the main part of the work which will be described in
detail in later parts. This proposal by no means is final, and plan is *will*
change as we advance through project.

    0. Deliverables
    1. Studying relevant material for the work
    2. Implantation steps
    3. Finalizing the all the modes should be implemented
    4. Summarising the common feature between the different Vase's
    5. Diving into buildbot's code
    6. Timeline

Deliverables
============
As mentioned before, the objective of the proposal is to implement source step
consistently and efficiently. Elaborating, the modes currently present are not
give enough option to specify for different kind of builds to end users. Target
of the project is to improve this feature.

After the summer, an user should be able to specify what kind of build he wants
to do and how. For example: User can specify a whether he want to remove all
the complied artifacts and build again[clean] or build only applying the
changes[incremental]. And user can also specify how to these kind of build with
the other arguments in the source step of build depending on the version
control system.

Study material resource
======================

.. [#] http://buildbot.net/buildbot/tutorial/
.. [#] http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/full.html
.. [#] http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/current/reference/
.. [#] http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/wiki/Documentation
.. [#] http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/latest/Buildbot-Tests.html
.. [#] http://trac.buildbot.net/ticket/669

Implementation steps
=================

 1. First step would be finding out what all the modes any user would like to
with VC steps.

 2. Second step would be figuring out the common behaviors across a number of
version control systems, and how to represent those behaviors to Buildbot's
users. This step involves reading about significant reading about different
VCSs. As a git and svn user and having worked on mercurial internal finding out
those behaviors should not be hard.

 3. Third step: Start writing code. As suggested it will be good to work on a
single VCS first and extended the feature to other VCSs. I planned to work first
on Mercurial then git and svn. I fairly figured which part of code lies where, I
will dig into the code in community bonding period.

Finalizing modes
================

As per the discussion on IRC and on the thread
http://trac.buildbot.net/ticket/669 The possible mode any user wants to have
are:

 1. Incremental
 2. Clean
 3. Fresh

 Incremental
~~~~~~~~~~~~
 It is same as the current update mode. Update the current repo with the changes
 and run the build keeping the all the build artifacts. Some other proposed. And
 in the case of mercurial other options can be update to the default branch, or
 build only if the revision is tagged.

 Clean
~~~~~~
Clean build is removing all the build artifacts, pull the changes and build
again.This may be similar to doing 'make clean'. In mercurial's philosophy is
equivalent to 'hg purge', but not 'hg purge --all'.

 Fresh
~~~~~~
This should be pristine working directory, either completely fresh clone or
created by doing 'hg purge --all', but later one is not as fresh as the
first. Difference between this mode and previous mode should be defined
clearly. Or should this be replaced by clobber? Sometime users may want to make
a new clone even at the cost of network traffic. If not what is the difference
between this and clobber?

And I think mode=copy should be there as it is for users choice.

Summarising common features
===========================
This part requires significant reading about various version control systems. This can started after
work mentioned in the above section is finished.

 References for this section
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. [#] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_revision_control_software
.. [#] https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/GitDocumentation
.. [#] http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/
.. [#] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/
.. [#] http://darcs.net/manual/
.. [#] http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/en/
.. [#] http://ximbiot.com/cvs/manual/

Diving into code
================

As far as I understand from the manual and api, each builder has a build factory
which is responsible for creating build objects. Build objects are performs each
build. These builds execute a sequence of steps called *buildsteps*. Source step
is a process of fetching the source from which build is performed. Depending
upon the properties set to build object eg. type, mode slaves check out source.

Most of the work would be modifying buildbot.step.source and making corresponding
changes in the slave side builslave.command.*

Timeline
========

Community bonding period
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Reading API documentation and code, get familiar with code.

1. Discussion and decision about various mode and properties of
various source step                                                     [1 week] Till May 30
2. Reading about different version control systems and finding out
various common funtionalities                                    [1 - 1.5 weeks] Till Jun 9
3. Start writing code. Write source step for mercurial                  [1 week] Till Jun 16
4. Write source step for Git and SVN                                   [2 weeks] Till Jun 30
5. Code for CVS                                                         [1 week] Till July 7
6. Write tests and fix issues (if any)                           [Till midterms]
-- Midterm evaluations
6. Code for bzr                                                         [1 week] Till July 22
7. Code for Darcs                                                       [1 week] Till July 29
8. Code for P4                                                          [1 week] Till Aug 5Th
9. Write tests and fix issues (if any)                             [Till finals]
10. Wind up and start submitting code to google

Contact Info
============

Name : Pradeepkumar Gayam
Email: in3xes@...
IRC nick: in3xes on Freenode
Timezone: IST

Experience
==========

Python
~~~~~~

I have significant experience in Python. I worked on mercurial internals and
submitted bunch of successful patches.Accepted patches can be found in mercurial
source tree. Besides that some academic projects and nearly 100 Project Euler
problems solved in Python.

Twisted Python
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I understood basic concepts and working of twisted. I haven't done anything for
real. I learned only after knowing about buildbot.

HTTP-based Protocols
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Implemented HTTP protocol in C just to learn about protocols and C. Source can
be found at https://github.com/in3xes/downloader I wrote it as
self-exercise. So, its not completely functional.

Web Development
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am member of core team of official college web development team[1], which
maintains all college data and websites. I developed couple of fully functional
applications in php. So, I think I can say I am good at it.

[1] http://www.iitr.ac.in/campus_life/pages/Groups_and_Societies+IMG+present_team.html

Databases
~~~~~~~~~

As part of the team mentioned above we should also maintain user database. I am
well versed with both MySQL and PostgreSQL.

Java Script frameworks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some simple applications of jQuery as part of applications mentioned above. I am
not an expert in this area, but I can make things work.

Git and Github
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fairly good at Git. I use Github as my primary hosting service. I didn't do
collaborative development before.

Development for Windows 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

None. (I don't think writing some very basic algorithm in visual C++ considered
 as development :) )

Note: This is draft proposal. I'll change the contents as per your feedback.

Thanks

- Pradeepkumar Gayam

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create and publish websites with WebMatrix
Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; 
WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and 
publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane