Re: Continuous integration

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 00:36:13 +0300 Dmitry Gutov <address@hidden> wrote: 

DG> On 7/14/17 11:08 PM, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
>> I think everyone is waiting. Besides me, no one else seems to have used
>> the test GitLab instance.

DG> And no email notifications means no actual usage.

We turned off e-mail notifications so we don't annoy people.

DG> I suspect what we actually need to do is to

DG>   - (optionally) Build a table of check marks with how the CI options 
correspond
DG> to the criteria we've enumerated.

I don't think that's necessary.

DG>   - Nag the Emacs maintainers and the FSF personnel about giving us a 
hardware,
DG> or even setting up a GitLab instance themselves, for the Emacs developers to
DG> use.

We already did that. We're at the stage of determining what to set up as
"the Emacs CI system."

DG>   - (important) Somehow deal with the perpetually-broken build and _set up 
email
DG> notifications_. There is no other practical way to encourage everyone to 
use the
DG> CI. And that's more essential than a (reasonable) choice of the CI server.

If you're talking about the temporary evaluation setup on gitlab.com, I
can work on that. But remember we're evaluating the CI system, not
actually switching to gitlab.com.

DG> So GitLab seems to come ahead as an obvious winner to me. If you really 
want us
DG> to vote, probably better to put that call into a new thread, instead of 
deep in
DG> the innards of this one.

I'll record your vote and have posted a new article calling for votes.

Thanks
Ted