On 2016-09-12 04:17, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > { > "workers": { > "10.5_ppc": { > "base": "" > }, > "10.5_ppc_legacy": { > "ports": "" > }, > "10.6_x86_64": { > "base": "", > "ports": "" > }, > "10.6_x86_64_legacy": { > "ports": "" > }, > "10.6_i386": { > "ports": "" > }, > "10.6_i386_legacy": { > "ports": "" > }, > "10.7_x86_64": { > "base": "", > "ports": "" > }, > "10.7_x86_64_legacy": { > "ports": "" > }, > "10.8_x86_64": { > "base": "", > "ports": "" > }, > "10.8_x86_64_legacy": { > "ports": "" > }, > "10.9_x86_64": { > "base": "", > "ports": "" > }, > "10.10_x86_64": { > "base": "", > "ports": "" > }, > "10.11_x86_64": { > "base": "", > "ports": "" > }, > "10.12_x86_64": { > "base": "", > "ports": "" > }, > "master": { > "docs-guide": "", > "docs-www": "" > } > } > } > > > > There are currently too many places in master.cfg that have knowledge of > which worker runs on which platform. I'd like to get all of that information > confined to the config file.
This list would be based on OS X installations, not on the function the buildslaves serve. Maybe we should split the list of builders between those tied to a machine and those that could run anywhere? My intention was that the builders "docs-guide" and "docs-www" can use the same slave. I do not see a need to use separate buildslave instances for them. That will make it easier to just add new builders for more tasks (for example portindex2sql or generating a web version of our port help/man pages). The configuration for "ports" has become special, as we make the assumption of a 1:1 mapping between builders and buildslaves. Rainer _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev