I reviewed the document, thanks for putting it together! I think it captures most of the requirements and the challenges that we are currently facing. I think that anyone who is actively contributing to the project or merging pull requests should read this document since this affects all of us.
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 1:55 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Neal for starting this discussion. I will review and comment. > > I will say that as a maintainer the current situation is very nearly > intolerable. As by far and away the most prolific merger-of-PRs [1], > I've been negatively affected by the long queueing times and delayed > feedback cycles. The project would not be able to accommodate 2x or 5x > the volume of PRs that we have now, and so it is urgent that we > develop a scalable cross-platform CI solution that is under this > community's control and does not require a high maintenance burden, so > if we need to increase the amount of resources dedicated to CI we can > unilaterally do so. > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/wesm/78bfda4cef3b23a5193cf4fb8a6540fb > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 1:38 PM Neal Richardson > <neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > Over the last few months, I've seen a lot of frustration and > > discussion around the shortcomings of our current CI. I'm also seeing > > debate over a few possible solutions; unfortunately, the debates tend > > not to resolve in a clear, decisive way, and we end up having the same > > debates repeatedly. > > > > In my experience, this pattern often happens when there's not a shared > > understanding of the problems we're trying to solve--it's hard to > > agree on a solution if we don't agree on the problem. To help us reach > > consensus on the problems, I've started a document: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fToW48TO-B9T8VRi0_Z30fDJkjOrBisc-Fr8Epl50s4/edit# > > > > Please have a look and add/edit freely. I've tried to capture the > > arguments I've seen go by the mailing list, as well as some from my > > own experience, but if I've mischaracterized anything, please rectify. > > > > I know several people have been exploring some potential solutions, > > and I hope this document can help us begin to discuss their relative > > merits more objectively and practically. > > > > Neal
