Hi everyone, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
> Hi, > > Christopher Baines <m...@cbaines.net> skribis: > >> Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: >> >>> Perhaps we could start by testing this hypothesis on a separate build >>> farm. Chris, Mathieu, WDYT? >> >> I'm currently thinking about attempting these kind of things (testing >> building derivations under different conditions) through the agent tags >> in the Guix Build Coordinator. >> >> I haven't used this functionality yet, but it's mostly implemented. The >> idea is that agents have tags, that describe various attributes that are >> important (time=normal, time=future, maybe for example), and builds can >> also be targeted at specific agents by tagging the builds with those >> same tags. > > Sounds nice! Also varying kernels I guess. > >> Where I'm going with this is that I'm not sure a separate build farm is >> needed, it would be good to just incorperate this in to the build farm >> used for testing patches and non-master branches. > > Sure. For the build-in-the-future thing, I think we could just do that > by default; what I meant is that we just need to double-check beforehand > that nothing breaks badly. I lost track of the details -- is this problem still likely to bite us in the future, or was something committed to mitigate against it? Thanks, Maxim
