From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id UPjQCdhOFGF3wgAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 00:27:36 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id 9SVmBdhOFGEmNQAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 22:27:36 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2A0227477 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 00:27:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:43198 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mDwhC-0001eT-Rq for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:27:34 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59114) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mDwh3-0001eJ-F7 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:27:25 -0400 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([2a01:7e00:e000:2f8:fd4d:b5c7:13fb:3d27]:46419) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mDwh1-0002o2-6t; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:27:25 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:8ac0:b4c7:f5c8:7caa]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EDFDB27BC78; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 23:27:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from capella (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 83b09617; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 22:27:19 +0000 (UTC) References: <87bl6hbd05.fsf@cbaines.net> <87a6lwoqrs.fsf@gnu.org> <87r1f2i82z.fsf@cbaines.net> <87im0d96ot.fsf@gnu.org> <87czqlhzia.fsf@cbaines.net> <87im0cnu6w.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.15; emacs 27.2 From: Christopher Baines To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: Project direction with testing changes (branches and patches) In-reply-to: <87im0cnu6w.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 23:27:14 +0100 Message-ID: <874kbvipml.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a01:7e00:e000:2f8:fd4d:b5c7:13fb:3d27; envelope-from=mail@cbaines.net; helo=mira.cbaines.net X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, guix-maintainers@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1628720855; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post; bh=Yv70DkB9yeeG4uq3YmuGOULJ4luiqVb5YR2yyCzFAkk=; b=YP8+yOzreLbbcMZori1ASKSkpsG6175V/hgk2pTZW/lor7tlgFlYo4JPHvZyOhpvPBquWl cjmj/1TK4JOr+h1x7LIK/8RSbs2i4KpT8FrUW0hB5YfsmktYCkDQKt0BuwztnN+b8Ux3ca sazFPIKESnP7b228bK5vl/yePShStLmkUmNnS6SIEErx0BUx5gtfQpKD1zW9YAFRzN6i2c cxoIQLCQXBuRGV1WwFM9IZjNxO/qm/uJXN7Kkfph87l0e1BL4yl36VjbiNw0/vb7SZYT1J 7d6yrnNf6/V7bXgth7z2N/92VsuN4JXDZA7gvwRw6u6/HKVdndSWVNoPodnjug== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1628720855; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=AxmvrUTAJfcCbodpcjT3SLkVwpUoNYpZBPHHURUUp1oSVGCvgIkmPbandSIckmB6t9C2Ke PXlKOcaLWhFhQ6abyt0sxdNc7RkiZ22W6CR/9Diu8CxArZjQj+KglMc7rtYor8oYQKvQLy a7FpOzisSbmzVGP3H+jqi4QEaHRTODn06E4Q3BStV8s85LLaq/AUa0Gvp9BTka8rcaSjlP BkCX5nvoNhDOceN4m0VJ6VdSu4YeHylSgYkYAcgTufjntmG+xjXclAs3uzGC8CVf/L5zmV gPNq1GaZTondgIi1IicltxnUYstKyd8rBWB1/qohgl3dlAG24SFxfejKdQplrA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.51 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: D2A0227477 X-Spam-Score: -4.51 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: +g0XXav8oHY8 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Hi Chris, > > Christopher Baines skribis: > >> I was thinking of using Cuirass for building derivations when testing >> patches, but I gave up on that approach back in 2019 after trying to use >> it (I discussed trying to use it here [1]). >> >> 1: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-03/msg00010.html >> >> I was specifically thinking about testing patches when I initially >> designed both the Guix Data Service and Guix Build Coordinator. For me >> at least, the focus has been on this direction for the last ~3 years. >> >> I realise that Cuirass now has some of the functionality that the Guix >> Data Service was written to provide, like tracking all >> packages/derivations in each revision. But from my perspective, Cuirass >> still lacks key things like being able to compare two revisions and >> tracking lint warnings. > > Cuirass has always had to track packages/derivations in each revision; > it=E2=80=99s been this way from day 1 when it started more or less as a > revisited Hydra, which did exactly this. I know it tracks some derivations against a revision, but it has only been tracking all of the derivations associated with each revision since this change [1]. 1: https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/guix/guix-cuirass.git/commit/?id=3D= bba1311478a50c837a8c70a556d308ca32ead816 >> There's also things like testing derivations on different hardware, >> regularly testing fixed output derivations and automatically retrying >> failed builds that I think the Guix Build Coordinator is better setup to >> do compared to Cuirass. >> >> But this feedback is why I started this thread. I don't see the same >> option as was found for improving substitutes by setting up a new >> substitute server using the Guix Data Service and the Guix Build >> Coordinator. There's a much stronger need to have one approach as a >> project for testing changes, and if using the Guix Data Service and Guix >> Build Coordinator isn't looking like a convincing option at this point, >> that's better to know now, compared to later when more time and effort >> has been put in. > > I can sympathize with the bitter feeling. I do think though that we > must work collectively; to me it=E2=80=99d be a problem if misplaced comp= etition > were to prevent us from moving forward. > > Several concrete incremental steps were proposed in this thread and > earlier. Instead of trying to provide a definite answer as to whether > the grand plan you propose is a convincing option at this point, I=E2=80= =99d > like us to collect the low-hanging fruits, in an opportunistic way. :-) > > Several easy hacks have been proposed in this thread and before: custom > web/CLI views for the Data Service, Cuirass APIs to spin up specs on the > fly, Data Service integration in Mumi/Gitile, Cuirass notifications sent > to the Data Service, etc. None of these is impressive in itself, but > each of these can be a step making our hacker lives better, IMO. > > WDYT? I don't perceive this as bitterness, just pragmatism. I think I have an answer now as to whether there's consensus on making use of the Guix Data Service and Guix Build Coordinator for testing changes. Knowing there's some objections is useful when considering the risk and managing my own expectations. I still personally think that the general direction this work is going is a good one. There's still some areas of uncertianty, but there's definitely some stuff that can be done to move forward and more discussion that can be had. Thanks for your suggestions on next steps, I still need to get my own thoughts in order. As you alluded to, I do like to have a plan in mind. Thanks, Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmEUTsJfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9Xecxg//dfR3fIve8NhoixxTKYTpgUbLEwX3H9N8 wmNx170C1/WSfH5jEice1H8PMG9ddhhcxYtMOm6orrH5tRe7ESjcG1LUtUrV1d2b Y6Jlcoe0Jp9s/JsKbVrUzqM+A4x9qPxrLmg6C5xHhV5sMTsW7IBnnymCl3K9D7jj nGP4urg/vN+FdgOVbzKKU835Dm5ytaPy1aWXTWScWPg3nosylWVR+DAVjo4TbFcc O9U+Zmkrq11p8xGOPh8vTgCmR8InrssuNclkiL6+v5pEQPBQ4CyQMW5GB5SwqlGT uSYHifd69XA4EEB7ROgP97tqp5Xr2/T0Ojd0fhbwoicEHZHufoe8qM3N2caA8uLy smd4WcEH9lunmqyx9bgjhVD15xqkuU3v0wJQrDg3JD+VI13C5lH37tdYcImI6y6x LPy9vyKdZiRjeE0OPv/kzxL38XjBZ/B04GxzQU922Pov+CzAMA0ifbfvwlYulr4O zTDepz/tgTnv4d1w9bP+xZPe435ueKLDH5l7NuQNSB1UdwMvDPJdljjb+MmipDdh TzF0jk/BCAk3SIQNKV7X+sMcvp3FD1nEaH52m87jrzgH808akClYcda29TjcoYqb bra2dsXr1PsCnSr5lLBeVmBPtN2jc5GZqfXsWZNtQ5DPsjcb9mkWC3JMvyNUn9Vh 1J0S/SwKGO0= =op6R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--