From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur Subject: bug#32540: Cuirass: we need a way to manually trigger evaluations Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 14:09:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87ftz0au58.fsf@lassieur.org> References: <87h8jgb0ki.fsf@lassieur.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56734) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fuGRm-00062k-S9 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:16:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fuGLK-0005cB-6T for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:10:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:56866) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fuGLK-0005be-1X for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:10:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fuGLJ-0000ry-Pl for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:10:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-reply-to: List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= Boskovits Cc: 32540@debbugs.gnu.org G=C3=A1bor Boskovits writes: > Cl=C3=A9ment Lassieur ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont:= 2018. aug. 27., > H, 11:54): > >> The 'core-updates' and 'staging' branches shouldn't trigger evaluations >> at each commit, because they produce too many derivations. Instead, the >> admins should have a 'trigger evaluation' button that they use once in a >> while. That button should be part of an 'admin interface', which should >> be protected by NGINX's 'auth_basic' authentication mechanism. >> >> > I agree that we need a mechanism like this. I am not sure about what the > protection > mechanism should be. 'auth_basic' has some appeal, as it is quite easy, b= ut > I would > like to hear some more opinions about that part. It's obviously not ideal, and we can implement something more sophisticated later.