On 2016-09-12 04:17, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> {
> "workers": {
> "10.5_ppc": {
> "base": ""
> },
> "10.5_ppc_legacy": {
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.6_x86_64": {
> "base": "",
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.6_x86_64_legacy": {
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.6_i386": {
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.6_i386_legacy": {
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.7_x86_64": {
> "base": "",
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.7_x86_64_legacy": {
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.8_x86_64": {
> "base": "",
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.8_x86_64_legacy": {
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.9_x86_64": {
> "base": "",
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.10_x86_64": {
> "base": "",
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.11_x86_64": {
> "base": "",
> "ports": ""
> },
> "10.12_x86_64": {
> "base": "",
> "ports": ""
> },
> "master": {
> "docs-guide": "",
> "docs-www": ""
> }
> }
> }
>
>
>
> There are currently too many places in master.cfg that have knowledge of
> which worker runs on which platform. I'd like to get all of that information
> confined to the config file.
This list would be based on OS X installations, not on the function the
buildslaves serve. Maybe we should split the list of builders between
those tied to a machine and those that could run anywhere?
My intention was that the builders "docs-guide" and "docs-www" can use
the same slave. I do not see a need to use separate buildslave instances
for them. That will make it easier to just add new builders for more
tasks (for example portindex2sql or generating a web version of our port
help/man pages).
The configuration for "ports" has become special, as we make the
assumption of a 1:1 mapping between builders and buildslaves.
Rainer
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
