Yes that's correct, Chris. Am 12.12.2017 4:46 nachm. schrieb "Chris Olivier" <[email protected]>:
> A quick google search seems to indicate that Mac can be used as a Jenkins > slave. Is this correct? > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 7:42 AM Steffen Rochel <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1 for #1 and #2 > > > > I’m working on getting a MacPro to add to CI system. > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 1:43 AM kellen sunderland < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Background: TravisCI is a startup providing managed continuous > > > integration services with GitHub integration and YAML based > > configuration. > > > TravisCI is one of the few CI providers that will build a variety of > > > OSX/MacOS builds for software projects. Their pricing ranges from Free > > > (for open source, 1 concurrent job, to $489 monthly for 10 concurrent > > jobs). > > > > > > Problem: We’ve had a few OSX build issues slip into MXNet master in the > > > past few weeks. We’ve previously had a Travis CI based testing system > > that > > > would have caught these issues. > > > > > > Proposals so far: > > > > > > 1) Use TravisCI in it’s free mode for a very minimal sanity check on > OSX. > > > If we compile the program, and for example run C++ unit tests we’re > > > unlikely to run into problems with queued builds. The total build time > > > here should be less than 15 minutes. Configuration should be quite > > simple > > > and easy to maintain. Error messages should also be obvious to > > > contributors. > > > 2) Run clang in Linux with our current CI. Building with clang should > > > take less than 10 minutes, should flush out a large subset of the > issues > > > we’ve seen with OSX, and be quite easy to maintain. > > > 3) Run full test-suites in TravisCI, equaling the level of coverage we > > > provide to Linux in Jenkins. This could require us to subscribe to a > > > monthly package with Travis to ensure our build queue doesn’t grow to > an > > > unacceptable length. It may also require a volunteer to setup and > > maintain > > > long-term. > > > > > > I’d +1 #1 and #2 as I think those should be low-cost, low-maintence > > > solutions that should catch the majority of the problems we’ve seen > thus > > > far. > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > >
