[Pharo-users] Pillar for 30 gone the way of the dodo on the CI

Marcus Denker marcus.denker at inria.fr
Thu Oct 1 04:10:14 EDT 2015

> On 01 Oct 2015, at 10:07, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker at inria.fr> wrote:
> Is CI an archive? 

What I mean: it seems to me not possible to keep all CI build alive “forever” as a CI server build.
Shouldn’t we separate “archival of builds” from “active ci”?

For Pharo itself we do that, as we do not have the manpower (we just don’t) to keep the CI alive for 
stable and dev, yet every build ever is on files.pharo.org <http://files.pharo.org/> *forever*, archived.


>> On 01 Oct 2015, at 10:05, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak at gmail.com <mailto:i.uhnak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> In Jenkins you specify configuration matrix (versions of pharo versus type (development, stable, ...)).. So it will run development for all versions, even pharo 30 (which is now permanently broken)
>> From: Stephan Eggermont <mailto:stephan at stack.nl>
>> Sent: ‎10/‎1/‎2015 9:47 AM
>> To: pharo-users at lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-users at lists.pharo.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Pillar for 30 gone the way of the dodo on the CI
>> On 01-10-15 09:41, Stephan Eggermont wrote:
>> > On 30-09-15 19:57, Ferlicot D. Cyril wrote:
>> >
>> >> We removed the Pillar job for Pharo 3 because we introduced an new
>> >> feature not backward compatible.
>> >
>> > Why is that a reason to remove the build? You have a configuration,
>> > don't you?
>> I would suggest: move to a separate job that is run much less often
>> and doesn't keep so many old artifacts. That makes it easier to get old 
>> stuff running again.
>> Stephan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20151001/42296c7c/attachment.html>

More information about the Pharo-users mailing list