http://www.rust-ci.org/

Adam Wilson flyboynw at gmail.com
Tue Feb 25 21:14:42 PST 2014


On Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:50:49 -0800, Brad Roberts <braddr at puremagic.com>  
wrote:

> On 2/25/14, 8:30 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:27:33 -0800, Kapps <opantm2+spam at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>> We use Bamboo at work and I like it quite a lot. Like all Atlassian
>> products it's free for Open-Source projects and it comes with source
>> code. It also has a very expansive REST API.
>>
>> But I'm not opposed to any CI so long as it does what we need it to do.
>> Mostly we just need CI. I still think that the Auto-Tester would be the
>> path of least resistance on this...
>
> The 'build' part of the auto-tester is the easiest part.  The majority  
> of the logic is in what to build when and the user interface on top of  
> that state.  None of that exists for this use case.  It's not hard  
> logic, but it would need to be built.
>
> This use case can likely also ignore the multi-platform part and stick  
> to just building on one which simplifies the job significantly.  And it  
> can also likely all be done on one box since it's likely that it can all  
> be done in a relatively short period of time.
>
> All that, in my mind, suggests that while it could be integrated into  
> the auto-tester, it gains little in doing so and puts more work on my  
> plate and more load on already loaded systems.  I think having a new  
> volunteer involved would be more long term beneficial.
>
> Later,
> Brad

Well, in my CI experience at work you want to run CI on every platform  
your trying to support as each is a different environment, and the AT has  
access to all of them. As for system load, you wouldn't do this in the  
pull tester. I'd argue that use this would increase load somewhat, but not  
significantly...

-- 
Adam Wilson
GitHub/IRC: LightBender
Aurora Project Coordinator


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list