On 30 June 2011 03:30, Yanni Chiu <yanni@rogers.com> wrote:
On 29/06/11 6:24 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote:
+1 to Sig's answer. Â Old builds are great, and we should (and do) keep them around, but they do not need to be on the CI server. Â As Sig said, the old versions don't change, so CI gets pretty boring.
There is the option to disable the build job, so that no further builds take place (until there are maintenance releases to build).
There is also the option to use the CI server as the build archive as well. You can mark some build numbers as "never remove". Normally, only the last N builds are kept, and the oldest is deleted after the new build completes (unless that oldest build is the last successful build, then it's kept until the next successful build). Whichever builds are marked "never remove" would form the archive. That would eliminate the apparent confusion caused by having the archive at https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/?group_id=1299
The other factor is that a transition to Jenkins from Hudson is happening, which is driving the desire to drop the Hudson based 1.2 builds.
Another aspect of it, that build servers has a limited space (Marcus has to cut the number of builds , since they taking too much space). While on gforge we can afford to keep much more. Of course keeping latest 'frozen' build doesn't takes too much , except of a little nuisiance after a couple of years every time you open a jenkins, you will see a very long list of jobs, where only few of them actually needed. That's why i thinking that moving things to archive is preferable. In any way, i think everyone understands that nobody wants to hide existing versions from public eyes. Its only a question of finding appropriate place for them, after development is done. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.