[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

From: Lukas-Fabian Moser
Subject: Re: Release schedule for 2.20
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 17:45:33 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0

Am 09.05.2018 um 17:23 schrieb Phil Holmes:
Question: How difficult/costly/... would it be to prepare a "daily
build from current master" for download?

Very.  We are talking about 6 hours of build time on a pretty solidly
powered 8-processor machine.  Actually, we _were_ talking about that
before adding the Catalan translation to the docs and further
complicating the Documentation build process in order to get more
compact PDFs.

On my GUB build machine (4 core hyperthreaded i7, 8 Gigs, SSD) an incremental build (i.e. with a stable version of GUB with the toolset all up to date) takes around one to one and a half hours. If GUB needs updating, it can, as you say, take over 6 hours even on that machine.  The upload is then a few Gigs and on my old broadband this took around 6 hours to upload. My shiny VDSL connection does it in about 5 minutes.  So a complete GUB rebuild is feasible.  However, I'm not sure that was what was requested. A simple Linux binary in a specific location of would be fairly straightforward - about 2 minutes for the build and very quick upload.

I admit that I thought more of a binary package than of the full documentation (which I gather is very involved to build). A possible rationale might be that a power-user who wants to have access to the latest features is likely to get to know these features by watching the -user or -devel lists, issue trackers etc., so it's maybe not terribly important to have the very latest documentation. (But I know that this argument could be disputed, for instance regarding the Internals manual).

As for the choice of the platform: One could argue that, e.g., binaries for Windows etc. might be even more useful than Linux binaries (which are comparatively easy to compile for oneself).

So: What I thought of when I asked about the costs of a "daily build" would be something like: Binaries for as many platforms as possible, but without the documentation. If something like that would be reasonable at all.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]