X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE222D1C9C0 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:40:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 71233-06 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:39:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from trolak.mydnsbox2.com (ns1.mydnsbox2.com [207.44.142.118]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D7DD1B54E for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:39:35 -0400 (AST) Received: from dunslane.net (x.ncshp.org [199.90.235.43]) (authenticated (0 bits)) by trolak.mydnsbox2.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hALKaRf22545 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:36:27 -0600 Message-ID: <3FBE69FB.70009@dunslane.net> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:39:39 -0500 From: Andrew Dunstan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030703 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Postgresql Hackers Subject: Re: Build farm References: <23062.1069440468@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <23062.1069440468@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200311/1202 X-Sequence-Number: 47490 Tom Lane wrote: > >I think the main value of a build farm is that we'd get nearly immediate >feedback about the majority of simple porting problems. Your previous >arguments that it wouldn't smoke everything out are certainly valid --- >but we wouldn't abandon the regression tests just because they don't >find everything. Immediate feedback is good because a patch can be >fixed while it's still fresh in the author's mind. > Yes, I seem to recall seeing several instances of things like "you mean foonix version 97 1/2 has a bad frobnitz.h?" over the last 6 months. Having that caught early is exactly the advantage, I believe. > >I'm for it ... > > I'm working on it :-) Regarding "make distcheck" that Peter suggested I use, unless I'm mistaken it carefully does its own configure, thus ignoring the configure options set in the original directory. Perhaps we need either to have the distcheck target pick up all the --with/--without and --enable/--disable options, or to have a similar target that does that. Thoughts? cheers andrew