On 2008-01-20 20:30, Richard Spindler wrote: ... > It makes testing easier, spotting regressions easier, spotting broken > builds will be possible, etc... >
Having a lot of builds can be a problem also. Unless there is a testing organization, specifically trying them, then asking users to update very often is probably not a good idea. A broken build or feature makes their tool unusable until it is fixed. Very few people using Cinelerra will update frequently, if they are also trying to accomplish real editing. > Anyways, arguing about why it should be done is not sufficient, if it > cannot be done for real. > > So, what kind of resources are available for any potential cinelerra > contributors? What is necessary for this effort is some kind of > dedicated machine, that is free to be bogged down with lengthy compile > cycles on a regular basis. It needs a permanent Internet connection, > it needs to run continuously and should have a little bandwidth to > waste, and not to little RAM. It is possible to rent such machines > quite cheaply, but "somebody" has to pay for it. Alternatively, > someone could donate hosting or a machine or both. (snip) > > So, any opinions? Good Idea? Bad Idea? Necessary? Unnecessary? How to > get it done? > > Cheers > -Richard > Well, a build farm is usually a lot more than one machine. It generally implies either a bunch of installed distros on virtual/multi-machines, or build environments for them (for the distros that support cross-package building.) It's not a small undertaking. The SUSE build service took a year or two to put in place. It's larger than what you are suggesting, but the tools and build setup are similar. -- Kevin _______________________________________________ Cinelerra mailing list [email protected] https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
