Mailing-List: contact infrastructure-dev-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: infrastructure-dev@apache.org
Received-SPF: unknown (nike.apache.org: error in processing during lookup of
 aharui@adobe.com)
From: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
To: "infrastructure-dev@apache.org" <infrastructure-dev@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Discussion on enabling users to specify own machines as dynamic
 hosts
Thread-Topic: Discussion on enabling users to specify own machines as
 dynamic hosts
Thread-Index: AQHPWaXAR4sF/aeED0ynZqfwXuxD5ZsUmi0A//+SoAA=
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:33:25 +0000
Message-ID: <CF742729.1F96C%aharui@adobe.com>
References: 
 <CAGaRif1i-LhduVZhDXpgr1WPUyp7rMt0EMnFCzg6fcm-EryWkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACK5iZcCQ5Bar2tiVVQAQpcJC_XM0OxH=65ugBR9k1XSe+-FfA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACK5iZcCQ5Bar2tiVVQAQpcJC_XM0OxH=65ugBR9k1XSe+-FfA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030
received-spf: None (: adobe.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <CCE1AF1C5A580E44AB0B6435859A562E@namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

There's been a lot of discussion on other lists like infra@ about targeted
donations as well as whether/how projects can use external/non-apache CI
servers.

My takeaway from the other discussions is that CI is not a "required"
service for Apache and that it is better for projects to simply build up
their own CI and not try to integrate it back to Apache builds.a.o.

When I think about the kinds of things Flex is going to want to do, like
install several browsers and players and AIR, it would further burden
those working on CI if other projects shared those servers and could have
their builds broken by the changes we make for Flex.  So right now, I'm
convinced we should just leverage the developer-controlled machines
exclusively for Flex CI.  The only "requirement" is that we should finish
that "setup" script and check it into SCM so that any developer can get a
server and set it up.  That way the project isn't hugely dependent on the
developers who are donating their CI Vms.

-Alex

On 4/16/14 12:04 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>lewis.mcgibbney@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>> This is a blatant re-post of my thread over on infra@ [0].
>>
>> During the meetup at ApacheCon, for a brief window discussion focused on
>> enabling people to 'donate' their machines are dynamic build slaves for
>> Jenkins to use.
>> From the conversation, as far as I am aware this is not currently
>>possible.
>> Seeing as dedicated build hosts are under constant stress, is this
>> something which would be appealing for us to pursue?
>>
>> [0] *http://s.apache.org/gE <http://s.apache.org/gE>*
>>
>>
>+1 for this idea.  Because of our constant issues with the Apache Build
>servers (especially the windows slaves), a couple of us committers have
>been started deploying and maintaining our own Jenkins instances on
>Windows
>Azure VMs (part of the complimentary MSDN accounts we get as Apache
>committers)
>
>We have been discussing ways to build a network of slave machines to make
>our builds go faster.  Something like this can help the entire Apache
>build
>system as well.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>
>
>> --
>> *Lewis*
>>