On 03/20/2012 11:16 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
You are materially impacted. AutoQA won't run until the entire
complete. Updates cannot be prepared until the entire build is complete.
Buildroots won't be updated with the build results until the entire
build is complete. You won't know if your build /fails/ on the arch
until it's done, etc...
Having one arch significantly slower than the others absolutely creates
material impact upon developers.
I haven't run this by anybody yet, so if it's nonsense just say so, but...
Would it be reasonable to, even amongst primary architectures, allow
these steps to go forward even if one arch fails while another succeeds?
Let's say we have arch-groups in primary- i686 and x86_64 are in a
group, armv7hl and armv5tel are in a group. The results of one group do
not inhibit the progress of another. Feasible with a bit of retooling,
or a nightmare waiting to happen? The discussion so far has focused
almost exclusively on build time. We hear you. Let's talk about what
to do about it. And what concerns there are besides build time.
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc(a)redhat.com