On Fri, 18 May 2018 13:13:04 -0400, Chris AtLee wrote: > IMO, it's not reasonable to keep CI builds around forever, so the question > is then how long to keep them? 1 year doesn't quite cover a full ESR cycle, > would 18 months be sufficient for most cases? > > Alternatively, we could investigate having different expiration policies > for different type of artifacts. My assumption is that the Firefox binaries > for the opt builds are the most useful over the long term, and that other > build configurations and artifacts are less useful. How accurate is that > assumption?
Having a subset of builds around for longer would be more useful to me than having all builds available for a shorter period. The nightly builds often include large numbers of changesets, sometimes collected over several days, and so it becomes hard to identify which code change modified a particular behavior. I always use opt builds for regression testing, and so your assumption is consistent with my experience. I assume there are more pgo builds than nightly builds, but fewer than all opt builds. If so, then having a long expiration policy on pgo builds could be a helpful way to reduce storage costs but maintain the most valuable builds. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
