qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] more automated/public CI for QEMU pullreqs


From: Daniel P . Berrangé
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] more automated/public CI for QEMU pullreqs
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:03:08 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25)

On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 06:48:08PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 22/08/19 18:31, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> >> With both these points in mind, I think it is  pretty hard sell to
> >> say we should write & maintain a custom CI system just for QEMU
> >> unless it is offering major compelling functionality we can't do
> >> without.
> 
> In theory I agree.
> 
> In practice, the major compelling functionality is portability.  If it
> is true that setting up runners is problematic even on aarch64, frankly
> GitLab CI is dead on arrival.  If it is not true, then I'd be very happy
> to use GitLab CI too.

Sure, I did qualify my statement in the text before that quoted here
to say that the patchew would have to offer some compelling feature
over GitLab. If GitLab can't be made to work with non-x86 runners,
then clearly non-x86 portability is the compelling feature that would
make Patchew a sensible option for QEMU.

I don't know what the problems are wrt to aarch64 & GitLab but the
scheme for connecting new runners to GitLab CI looks pretty flexible
when I examined it, so I'd really hope non-x86 is not a show stopper.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|



reply via email to

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