Am Sun, 16 Apr 2017 10:13:50 +0200 schrieb Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>:
> > I asked at a recent D meetup about what gitlab CI used as their > backing platform, and it seems like it's a front for TravisCI. YMMV, > but I found the Travis platform to be too slow (it was struggling to > even build GDC in under 40 minutes), and too limiting to be used as a > CI for large projects. That's probably for the hosted gitlab solution though. For self-hosted gitlab you can set up custom machines as gitlab workers. The biggest drawback here is missing gitlab integration. > > Johannes, what if I get a couple new small boxes, one ARM, one > non-descriptive x86. The project site and binary downloads could then > be used to the non-descriptive box, meanwhile the ARM box and the > existing server can be turned into a build servers - there's enough > disk space and memory on the current server to have a at least half a > dozen build environments on the current server, testing also i386 and > x32 would be beneficial along with any number cross-compilers > (testsuite can be ran with runnable tests disabled). Sounds like a plan. What CI server should we use though? I tried concourse-ci which seems nice at first, but it's too opinionated to be useful for us (now worker cache, no way for newer commits to auto-cancel builds for older commits, ...) -- Johannes
