Another proposal for modernization of our infrastructure

Jan Kundr√°t jkt at
Sat Jan 31 11:56:56 GMT 2015

On Saturday, 31 January 2015 12:20:15 CEST, Inge Wallin wrote:
> Given how few of our community who have participated so far, I think it 
> borders on pure falsehood to claim "clear consensus" on *anything*. I would 
> put more like "some people want it", and I can certainly see 
> the appeal.

Fair enough, you have a point -- I suspect there is no consensus that CI is 
useful, or that there is any value in having a clean git history without 
"fix missing semicolon" commits. I agree that having a per-commit CI 
coverage can be well considered an undesirable thing by some developers.

Which is why I have no intention of pushing these to all KDE projects. What 
I am proposing is an opt-in for those who care.

> But 
> from that to simply state "the costs in HW are worth it" (and conveniently 
> forgetting cost in maintenance) is a very long step.

I believe that the cost of maintenance is sufficiently covered by section 5 
of the proposal, so I have to admit that I don't know what I am 
conventiently forgetting about.

Could you please explain what maintenance cost you are worried about? Is it 
perhaps related to the number of build jobs being run, or the number of 
throwaway VMs we use for builds? Is it about the services which replace 

The scripting which is currently used for build VMs with Gerrit/Zuul lives 
at [1]. The bootstrapping part which turns a downloaded, minimal VM image 
into a build node is [2].



Trojit√°, a fast Qt IMAP e-mail client --

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list