On Tuesday, 30 October 2018 14:57:01 PDT Christian Gagneraud wrote: > > Looking at the fact, that we can’t earn money on a build system and that > > it would require quite a lot of funding to make it more than a niche > > product it doesn’t make sense to pursue it further. Instead we would > > rather use the money to improve Qt and Qt Creator. > This doesn't add up, why did you develop and still develop and > maintain 'coin' then? > You're not making money with it. It's costing you (a lot?) and is a > critical part of your QA infra.
I think the answer is simple: none of the alternatives worked. COIN is not the first CI system we've had, it's actually the third. I don't remember a discussion on the benefits and drawbacks of similar solutions (like Jenkins) at the time COIN was adopted. There may have been an analysis done inside TQtC I am not aware of (mostly because I'm not interested in). -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
