On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:55 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> 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 > usually.
Right - they do need persistence, and to have someone who takes responsibility for them. >> >> 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. Yes, exactly. I'm happy to take responsibility for them, I just wanted to make sure that numpy devs could get at them if I'm not around for some reason. Matthew _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
