[nanomsg] Re: New fork (was Re: Moving forward)

  • From: Bent Cardan <bent@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:15:21 -0400

I second everything you wrote Garrett.

When we get windows building on master I think it would be a substantial 
milestone from which we could this move this project off the beta versioning 
and switch to semver. Well something to think about.

Now if we want PR ci integration with an iOS build then the obvious solution is 

In response to Dirkjan, the difference between gitter and #freenode IRC is 
analogous to the difference between code hosted on Google project versus code 
you can host on github. 

In gitter you can reply to the chat with github flavored markdown style code 
syntax highlighting. 

But the best part is that the chatroom is a persisted storage venue. This is 
good and bad. It's good because if you miss some cool conversation, you get 
free history. This is also bad for the same reason. If you make regrettable 
statement at some point then it will be part of the free history of the chat. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 20, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Garrett D'Amore <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mar 20, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Martin Lucina <martin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> I was planning on migrating at least some of the slaves (Linux, FreeBSD) to
>>> Xen VMs on different physical hardware which I host elsewhere, however if
>>> you are going to migrate to Travis then I'd rather just save myself doing
>>> the work and switch it all off.
>> IIRC Travis only runs Linux and a trial of OS X, so it might still be
>> worth it to preserve some of the other stuff. On other hand, maybe
>> Garrett has another solution in mind for this.
> Looking at what we have today, if we can keep the build slaves running for 
> just a wee bit longer, I think it would be useful.  I would like to get 
> travis CI up and running — at least part of the reason for this is so that 
> other people can follow the recipes there and validate their own PRs.  (Plus, 
> Travis has *very* nice PR support— you can pre-test your PRs before merging, 
> and everyone can see those test results, including the PR submitter.)
> I'll have to chat up the Travis people to ask about OS X support.  I suspect 
> that FreeBSD is not going to be easy to come by, and that support for Solaris 
> is going to be nigh impossible — particularly SPARC.   But it also sounds 
> like you’re planning on retiring the SPARC servers you have?
> That said, we’re going to miss CI for a lot of other platforms — people are 
> running nanomsg on ARM systems, in iOS, on OpenBSD, NetBSD, HPUX, VxWorks 
> (?), etc.  We can’t have CI for all of them at this point in time.  The loss 
> of FreeBSD would be a shame, and I have personal reasons for wishing we’d 
> have CI support for Solaris or illumos (esp. the latter), but again, I don’t 
> think any of the CI providers have an interest.
> Right now, its unclear to me that our current CI setup does anything more 
> than verifying that stuff builds.  The self tests don’t seem to be built 
> unless building with cmake on Windows.  That’s something that needs to be 
> fixed.  Frankly, I think there is more value in having the self-tests 
> execute, even if *only* on Linux, then on ensuring we are still building on 
> other platforms. (Not that I want to stop supporting those other platforms.)
> The other thing I’d to do is get us using appveyor for Windows testing.  I’m 
> most definitely *not* a Windows developer, but it seems that there is a lot 
> of effort that has been expended to support that platform, and it would be 
> nice if we could ensure we didn’t regress on it.  That becomes especially 
> important as I don’t have any systems running windows within normal easy 
> reach of me.
>    - Garrett

Other related posts: