I don't think its much burden, but when we have code complexity it can add up with a matter of "how useful is this really.." Even if maintenance burden is low it is still a tradeoff. I'm just saying I suspect its possible to do this, but not sure if it is useful in the end (and I'm not looking to make the call on that)
~Justin Wood (Callek) On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 1:22 PM Steve Fink <sf...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On 01/03/2019 10:07 AM, Justin Wood wrote: > > on the specific proposal front I can envision us allowing tests to be run > > on non-pgo builds via triggers (so never by default, but always > > backfillable/selectable) should someone need to try and bisect an issue > > that is discovered... I'm not sure if the code maintenance burden is > worth > > it for the benefit but I don't hold a strong opinion there. > > Is it a lot of maintenance? We have this for some other jobs > (linux64-shell-haz is the one I'm most familiar with, but it's a > standalone job so doesn't have non-toolchain graph dependencies). I get > quite a bit of value out of the resulting faster hack-try-debug cycles; > I would imagine it to be at least as useful to have a turnaround time of > 1 hour for opt vs 2 hours for pgo. > > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
