From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id SC/DCxs9JGACZQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:07:55 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id qOJ8Bxs9JGB2YgAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:07:55 +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 97F4D9402B3 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:51924 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9vmD-0000bo-EO for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:07:53 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:32780) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9vlk-0000ZZ-Mw for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:07:24 -0500 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:52116) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9vlh-0003pn-PK; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:07:24 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:8ac0:b4c7:f5c8:7caa]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5EAC527BC25; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:07:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from capella (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id ff4289b6; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:07:17 +0000 (UTC) References: <878s7xx9tx.fsf@cbaines.net> <87sg642nqy.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.14; emacs 27.1 From: Christopher Baines To: Mathieu Othacehe Subject: Re: The Guix Build Coordinator in 2021 In-reply-to: <87sg642nqy.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:07:15 +0000 Message-ID: <87h7mjlma4.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.71.252.8; 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 Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.46 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: 97F4D9402B3 X-Spam-Score: -4.46 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: 01+TYcIkMbdk --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Mathieu Othacehe writes: > We are now in a situation where our continuous integration system, > while performing better and better is getting out of hand. Here are the > different software I'm keeping track of: > > * Cuirass, deployed on ci.guix.gnu.org > * The Guix Build Coordinator, deployed on guix.cbaines.net > * The Guix Data Service, deployed on data.guix.gnu.org > * Patchwork, deployed on patchwork.cbaines.net > > All those services have databases, using different DBMS on different > servers. Those databases are sometimes overlapping, in the same way as > some of the features of those software. > > In particular I feel that what's implemented in the Guix Build > Coordinator can be seen as a subset of Cuirass functionalities. As you > know, I'm reluctant to the idea of connecting Cuirass to the Guix Build > Coordinator, because most of Cuirass PostgreSQL database content would > be duplicated in the SQLite database of the GBC. > > On the other hand, maintaining those two software in separate ways seems > like a huge waste of time given the very limited number of people > contributing the maintenance of the CI system. > > Furthermore, some of the features we are implementing here, should be > part of the "guix-daemon" itself, which makes me think that we should > not place too much effort in their development. > > My proposition would be to make a listing of both Cuirass and the GBC > features, and see how we could merge them. By maintaining a single > software, with a single database, running on the same server, we could > spare some efforts, and quickly converge towards a better CI. > > The new Cuirass architecture and the switch to PostgreSQL, make the > software way more modular, and should allow us to add new > functionalities without too much trouble. > > What do you think of that proposition? I think there's definitely opportunity here, but I'd suggest first looking at the situation in abstract, ignoring the existing software, and just focus on what a good situation would be regarding "CI". With consensus about direction, it should be much easier to make decisions about the software involved. Using the "CI" term to describe a system isn't particularly clear to me, especially in the context of Guix, so I'm going to use different terms. In my mind at least, I'm currently thinking about two things, testing patches and non-master branches, and building substitutes for the master branch and making these available. The direction I've been looking in also is to treat those two things as quite separate concerns (which doesn't exclude using the same software for them). What in your mind would a good "CI system" for Guix do? I'm asking this in the sense of responsibilties. Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmAkPPNfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9Xcemw/8Cz+5PLLiAHH54+IZgjXqOL/l4jxdBQYV TqKKI3+FeFB3Xbs1wk7GZlk7/aMeLWC3Z4qmud4PluBx3updLEpVDqPUovKm7dWj EAhdu8m2KHoL/Qg1yEy4P5NooxWH100301PlGs8aWuytljlGTmuZW73T4hF+9EC1 HYyS7am8ks5hyXwRSAT1mvmMP/h+zdM3ZYILiQUxVp237jx4h40YNkcVlTCW57t8 VyzW6OGbFqEOzM8/jVjGZz38MV27a//N5XoZyWIUz8XSR5GhehvqisfG7lbNQCJi rpMl3oWYLX0MB0z6gSUs2LtDLo2Sm+UrW383bQiizySJuLzI1CoEOCMl6Aim4BxQ FRh1rgbE+6f+PkYxYSvX0ux2yS7UJgkoD5qEDurIHIJdgEeiCGn+uVEnjgLzu9Yf B0nCmmwEtQj687p1hNgOlRLn0K27KSx4ZOWvlZxwh62/DIvGf1d41NUa39eRP5tp O734wu8X6ha3+jTMqfnRqqcEwc3FqBJYT4Qk/1SmXHvl3f2cvd6SDzjHEcEMB5E+ bEpfWZNMiov4f+75XVKgjlVIYaYJKL1FDH0jauOe81NH4/KdtNE4o0T7CUHwYiNk i5wFH6yaxkQmmXn2hetln/YbX4lJuvJ9RRBo2PSTH5otNHQJf/skwxrl/xA3lMVf WREgNm/UH88= =jeF0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--