From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31073 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2017 22:40:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 31061 invoked by uid 89); 15 Dec 2017 22:40:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=companies, hey, organization X-HELO: mail-qk0-f194.google.com Received: from mail-qk0-f194.google.com (HELO mail-qk0-f194.google.com) (209.85.220.194) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 22:40:45 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f194.google.com with SMTP id i130so12206431qke.4 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:40:45 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4f3WJQnWa8ZNxlQdrHQEjpt7iDGlex8laQCFRMrw/AU=; b=gU5t2Sf/rE6P6/2cTY8db1+geSnXhs6nvXInSMTkpgFRAEsjOIhpmdkNiz/yYSdCJf tNHXrU3W0sjtq7uobcCkNRxi5Sq/upoiSjVqcfcAE5w8deoWiq69p6HsfoVViZgf0ig4 AloaPAn6DbuuBWMTg6uJJwXr311OZa2ENb0jztro5jgKXPyGW933RFEtaUjQ71074a1E +UyPeuCAR/uNLwEvasczDBcfBbKk8j+Iensupsy94H7I7qW0PDUaYNQWjQEZ/WVnZSSp v32dJ8KgOyeM52dw9CSyHafL61ejVGl9xLTM0N5FLzHNoitkj4Bajuq8aJT9GNmU9iTZ E6YA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mI8dgQTGCk9kq/3q/8KitEtiiAG+viBt3htX5CQ0Sr3lsr3I6eP T2ycZkurRQGdYPH9oMzFw5J5uZyE+6GJ2gaGyA4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotEeFDzmR7qTPhsGs362UrcXJdcZT6N6Ar2b2NLlVM1SeoPNRCSBFAqsGdGe/oicx6BwS7ZhR3GhS7ER+AkPAk= X-Received: by 10.55.78.136 with SMTP id c130mr24288394qkb.156.1513377643611; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:40:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.196.134 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:40:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <87d13g6r5t.fsf@redhat.com> <878te46pk4.fsf@redhat.com> From: David Edelsohn Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 22:40:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [BuildBot] Notifications disabled for Debian-s390x-* and Fedora-ppc64*-* builders To: Yao Qi Cc: Sergio Durigan Junior , GDB Patches , Edjunior Machado Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-SW-Source: 2017-12/txt/msg00396.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:34 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: >> >> But the irony in your message should not be ignored. You implicitly >> express that the buildbots are ignored, except possibly x86 and Try >> Builds on x86, while you proceed to ask for additional participation. > > How do you get such implicit message? That is your bias. We still have > aarch64 and aarch32 buildslaves, they are quite stable, and catches > some build failures with g++ 4.8 and regressions. > > These builders are disabled because they are useless. Sergio asks for > participation to make these builders useful. If no one wants to make these > builders better, or cares about them, it is reasonable to disable them. It > is equivalent to code/feature/port deprecation, if nobody maintains the > code/feature/port, we'll deprecate it. > >> This is fundamentally inconsistent. Actions speak louder than words >> and this demonstrates the priorities of the GDB community. > > I don't see the inconsistency here. We need more participation or contribution > to make these builders more useful, it is simple, isn't? The buildbots are the responsibility of both the organization providing the servers and the community. No one from the community noticed anything wrong with the s390x debian buildbot for months. And no one said: "Hey, it looks like something is wrong with this buildbot, can the s390x community take a look?" The message was: "The warning messages from the buildbot are annoying, so we're disabling them." ARM is running their own CI. If they are the ones noticing the problems and reporting the problems from the buildbot, they don't need a public buildbot infrastructure to accomplish that. It's not a good message to ask companies to contribute more resources while rationalizing why the current resources are ignored or under-utilized. The GDB community apparently is overwhelmed by the current resources, so additional resources would not help. Thanks, David