From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Bavier Subject: Re: Adding build status to the package list table Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:25:16 -0600 Message-ID: <1acf047283ab3088655651b5b267b35a@openmailbox.org> References: <87poz6jgqi.fsf@gnu.org> <87twohiwxl.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57006) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzWhx-00085D-55 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:25:34 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzWht-0005vh-RZ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:25:33 -0500 Received: from smtp10.openmailbox.org ([62.4.1.44]:57810) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzWht-0005ul-Fy for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:25:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87twohiwxl.fsf@netris.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, guix-devel-bounces+ericbavier=openmailbox.org@gnu.org On 2015-11-19 13:57, Mark H Weaver wrote: > Roel Janssen writes: > >> The list of packages included in Guix [1] provides links to the build >> status of each package in the details. I would like to provide this >> information in a column after "Package details", either as an icon or >> as >> a count (e.g. 3/4 builds succeeded). This provides a nicer overview >> for >> the current status of the package. > > Sounds good to me, but I'm not sure that either a single icon or a > count > will be very useful. > > We currently support four architectures: x86_64-linux, i686-linux, > armhf-linux, and mips64el-linux. There will likely be a fifth for the > Hurd as well. > > If the status is to be useful, users will need to see at a glance if > the > package builds on their chosen architecture. A count like 2/4 or 3/4 > doesn't tell me whether the package works on armhf. > > So, I think we'd actually need one new column for each supported > architecture. I could imagine more clever solutions as well, but > somehow it needs to indicate *which* architectures the package builds > on, not just how many. I agree. Could we add a small icon in the expanded view next to the current links that indicate pass/fail for that architecture? This could possibly in addition to the summary count in the collapsed view. -- `~Eric