On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 03:03:18 +0000 (UTC) Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > > If travis will change their terms of service in future and our > > workflow/infra will depends on these checks, whole development > > process may be hampered. > > Our infra has no dependency over travis. The only thing we've done infra > side about this is to create the alias travis-ci and an ml[1] > (gentoo-automated-testing) where we plan to send the output of several > automated tools so that interested parties can check the status and "fix" > any issues. > > [1] - https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-automated-testing/ > > > So developers should think twice before depending their workflow on > > this solution. I'm refusing to sign up to the list which in my > > opinion indirectly violates Gentoo social contract. > > I fail to see how by adding yourself to the alias, joining the ml or > checking the archives, you are breaking in any way the Social Contract - > but every developer is free to choose whether to use this tool or not.
Right now there is no hard dependency on github or travis, of course. But present pathway worries me: with current pace at some point we _will_ depend on travis or github too much. Then they may change their terms of service or license argeement, or just shut down the whole service (as Google recently shut down Google Code). And then we will be in a great trouble. And then it may be too late to change anything. I want to avoid this, that's all. What we should really do is to develop our own QA tools or use existing free ones on our own infrastructure, thus that Gentoo development may continue to be independent and unbiased. Please understand that I'm grateful for all people improving Gentoo, including Michał, for their hard work. But we should not solely rely on third-party proprietary solutions (travis is a github lock-in) because of convenience. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko
pgpm7H50waV8O.pgp
Description: PGP signature
