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 OEFFFGC8I2AIZgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:58:40 +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 iEQAEGC8I2ACYAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:58:40 +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 ACD399402AB for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:58:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:44616 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9nCg-00085P-K0 for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 05:58:38 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48222) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9nCL-00083X-KW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 05:58:19 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41595) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9nCK-0006Fg-Q3; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 05:58:17 -0500 Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:3165:bcdf:e1b3:a08d] (port=59620 helo=cervin) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1l9nCI-0002af-MI; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 05:58:15 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe To: Christopher Baines Subject: Re: The Guix Build Coordinator in 2021 References: <878s7xx9tx.fsf@cbaines.net> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:58:13 +0100 In-Reply-To: <878s7xx9tx.fsf@cbaines.net> (Christopher Baines's message of "Tue, 09 Feb 2021 20:30:51 +0000") Message-ID: <87sg642nqy.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: -2.86 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; 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: ACD399402AB X-Spam-Score: -2.86 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: QhN2GhIMXZrn Hello Chris, > Near the beginning of 2020, things changed such that I suddenly had some > time, and some of that time I spend putting idea's I'd had for a while > around building derivations, including across multiple machines, in to > practice [1]. With the Guix Build Coordinator, you made an impressive work, probably based on the observation that the "guix-daemon" and its offloading mechanism was too limited. 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? Thanks, Mathieu