On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com>

> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey,
> >>
> >> A recent post to the wheel-builders mailing list pointed out some
> >> links to places providing free PowerPC hosting for open source
> >> projects, if they agree to a submitted request:
> >>
> >> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/wheel-builders/2017-
> February/000257.html
> >>
> >> It would be good to get some testing going on these architectures.
> >> Shall we apply for hosting, as the numpy organization?
> >
> >
> > Those are bare VMs it seems. Remembering the Buildbot and Mailman
> horrors, I
> > think we should be very reluctant to taking responsibility for
> maintaining
> > CI on anything that's not hosted and can be controlled with a simple
> config
> > file in our repo.
> Not sure what you mean about mailman - maybe the Enthought servers we
> didn't have access to?

We did have access (for most of the time), it's just that no one is
interested in putting in lots of hours on sysadmin duties.

> For buildbot, I've been maintaining about 12
> crappy old machines for about 7 years now [1] - I'm happy to do the
> same job for a couple of properly hosted PPC machines.

That's awesome persistence. The NumPy and SciPy buildbots certainly weren't
maintained like that, half of them were offline or broken for long periods

>  At least we'd
> have some way of testing for these machines, if we get stuck - even if
> that involved spinning up a VM and installing the stuff we needed from
> the command line.

I do see the value of testing on more platforms of course. It's just about
logistics/responsibilities. If you're saying that you'll do the
maintenance, and want to apply for resources using the NumPy name, that's
much better I think then making "the numpy devs" collectively responsible.

NumPy-Discussion mailing list

Reply via email to