> OH amount of CPU is indeed not "infinite". We have plenty of disk and RAM to
> go
> around. The way I see it is "keep build jobs in the background and they take
> however long they take". Developers should be able to run builds on their own
> boxes far faster than the shared infra and all this
On 27/09/2018 02:21, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 20:32:00 +0900 Hermet Park said:
>
>> then do we expect users need to toggle features on/off manually?
>
> I would say so - yes. automagic has downsides for reproducible builds.
>
I agree here, when some
Hi all,
Regardless of gitlab vs phab while Bertrand has done a great job for a
long time I think that rebuilding our infra on a more mainstream distro
makes a lot of sense, because it will be much easier to document and for
more people to understand. Whether it ends up being Centos, openSUSE
Leap
I will gladly sponsor a server to host on until we get e5 reinstalled and going
again.
I think here before a new server is mentioned, we need to see about decide
about distribution as that will open up a whole new can of worms
Sent from my iPhone
> On 26 Sep 2018, at 17:56, Stefan Schmidt
My suggestion would be to move to a temporary server and use the full power of
the physical server and chroots and or docker containers. I think using the
bare metal setup right on something like centos would provide us with better
stability. If more bleeding edge stuffnis needed go for fedora.
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:05:25 -0700 "Bertrand Jacquin via RT"
said:
i already checked on the parts. i can buy a fan, but we had a spare parts box
bought and shipped WITH the server and it has a spare fan in it. that fan
should be the correct one according to my checks. if that box of spares can
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:05:25 -0700 "Bertrand Jacquin via RT"
said:
i already checked on the parts. i can buy a fan, but we had a spare parts box
bought and shipped WITH the server and it has a spare fan in it. that fan
should be the correct one according to my checks. if that box of spares can
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 22:09:22 +0100 Bertrand Jacquin said:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 12:26:03PM +0100, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:51:44 +0100 Bertrand Jacquin
> > said:
> >
> > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 09:16:23AM +0100, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 12 Sep
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 22:17:29 +0100 Bertrand Jacquin said:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 12:32:01PM +0100, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:50:00 +0100 Bertrand Jacquin
> > said:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 06:45:20AM -0500, Stephen Houston wrote:
> > > > OSUOSL is great.
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 22:08:14 +0100 Bertrand Jacquin said:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:54:16AM +0100, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:57:27 +0100 Bertrand Jacquin
> > said:
> >
> > > > > This is something I do not agree with. I have been kicking into pants
> > > > > for
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 20:32:00 +0900 Hermet Park said:
> then do we expect users need to toggle features on/off manually?
I would say so - yes. automagic has downsides for reproducible builds.
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 4:34 AM Marcel Hollerbach wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > with this morning a
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 19:44:54 +0200 Vincent Torri said:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:24 PM Marcel Hollerbach wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > new update!
> > Everything beside the bindings is added, there is a README that sums up
> > everything. All known bugs are fixed.
> >
> > I plan to merge
1. Yes I'm referring to the sponsored hosting Mike referenced. As to
whether or not that is ideal - that is one of the reasons I wanted to see
people's opinions on the slowvote.
2. I'm well aware you spent time on the thread and played with the
prototype. I'm also aware that not all questions
Hello.
On 9/26/18 5:30 PM, Stephen Houston wrote:
> A. We were assured the server could be provided free of charge. I.E.
> "Sponsored" not bought or paid for as you and raster seem to think
> sponsored means.
The server you mentioned here is the cloud hosting Mike offered? I read
nothing
On 9/26/18 5:27 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
Hello.
On 9/26/18 4:48 PM, Marcel Hollerbach wrote:
There is a difference between a precise plan on what kind of changes are
done and what the overall plan looks like.
- What is happening to the CI, cgit, wiki etc.
A fair question.
- Is the
A. We were assured the server could be provided free of charge. I.E.
"Sponsored" not bought or paid for as you and raster seem to think
sponsored means.
B. If you would have spent the last month or so since that Gitlab thread
started actually testing or using the prototype set up, you would see
Hello.
On 9/26/18 4:48 PM, Marcel Hollerbach wrote:
> There is a difference between a precise plan on what kind of changes are
> done and what the overall plan looks like.
>
> - What is happening to the CI, cgit, wiki etc.
A fair question.
> - Is the sponsoring a permanent choice, or just
There is a difference between a precise plan on what kind of changes are
done and what the overall plan looks like.
- What is happening to the CI, cgit, wiki etc.
- Is the sponsoring a permanent choice, or just something for a year or
so, and the overall plan is to migrate back, (this was also
There is no point in developing a plan if we dont know what the plan is or
what the desire is of the community.
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 9:21 AM Marcel Hollerbach wrote:
> I don't really see where this vote does make any sense.
> There is currently no one stepping up, saying he does the migration,
I don't really see where this vote does make any sense.
There is currently no one stepping up, saying he does the migration,
there is no plan how the move should be done, there is no plan on where
the funding would come from.
How should i decide if a move would make sense or not in this
Hello developers,
Please take the time to consider options and vote on a migration to Gitlab
and infrastructure possibilities here: https://phab.enlightenment.org/V39
Thanks,
Stephen
___
enlightenment-devel mailing list
I get the impression that almost everyone is on board with gitlab and the
debate is whether or not we should implement it on our own infra or
sponsored infra. Then the follow up becomes who will do the migration. I'll
start a slow vote and mail it out.
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 12:37 AM wrote:
> I
Hello Dave.
I have recently disabled all builds on Jenkins. The only job I left
enabled is your base_pyefl_build job.
Disabling the jobs was only the first step towards shutting down Jenkins
on our server completely.
That leaves the question open what do do with the pyefl job. Is this
Hello.
On 9/25/18 11:08 PM, Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
> Memory is not the issue here, CPU is. Each VM has 4GB or RAM, each build
> use -j6 and we can have up to 4 jenkins build at the same time, this on
> 3 different VM.
>
> Read this a different way: having build and servers (web, git etc) is
24 matches
Mail list logo
