[Numpy-discussion] PowerPC testing servers

[Ralf Gommers]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:55 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Matthew Brett <
> matthew.brett at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hey,
> >> >>
> >> >> A recent post to the wheel-builders mailing list pointed out some
> >> >> links to places providing free PowerPC hosting for open source
> >> >> projects, if they agree to a submitted request:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/wheel-builders/2017-
> February/000257.html
> >> >>
> >> >> It would be good to get some testing going on these architectures.
> >> >> Shall we apply for hosting, as the numpy organization?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Those are bare VMs it seems. Remembering the Buildbot and Mailman
> >> > horrors, I
> >> > think we should be very reluctant to taking responsibility for
> >> > maintaining
> >> > CI on anything that's not hosted and can be controlled with a simple
> >> > config
> >> > file in our repo.
> >>
> >> Not sure what you mean about mailman - maybe the Enthought servers we
> >> didn't have access to?
> >
> >
> > We did have access (for most of the time), it's just that no one is
> > interested in putting in lots of hours on sysadmin duties.
> >
> >>
> >> For buildbot, I've been maintaining about 12
> >> crappy old machines for about 7 years now [1] - I'm happy to do the
> >> same job for a couple of properly hosted PPC machines.
> >
> >
> > That's awesome persistence. The NumPy and SciPy buildbots certainly
> weren't
> > maintained like that, half of them were offline or broken for long
> periods
> > usually.
>
> Right - they do need persistence, and to have someone who takes
> responsibility for them.
>
> >>
> >>  At least we'd
> >> have some way of testing for these machines, if we get stuck - even if
> >> that involved spinning up a VM and installing the stuff we needed from
> >> the command line.
> >
> >
> > I do see the value of testing on more platforms of course. It's just
> about
> > logistics/responsibilities. If you're saying that you'll do the
> maintenance,
> > and want to apply for resources using the NumPy name, that's much better
> I
> > think then making "the numpy devs" collectively responsible.
>
> Yes, exactly.  I'm happy to take responsibility for them, I just
> wanted to make sure that numpy devs could get at them if I'm not
> around for some reason.
>

In that case, +1 from me!

Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20170216/c7379b69/attachment.html>