Cheers,
Tony
Sent from my iPhone - Please excuse any brevity or typos.
> On 8 Aug 2015, at 23:44, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> --F41/6/O0EvKTfNqT
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> We are running builds on ASF infra for our source and java artifacts, but a=
> s I
> said it takes a lot of resource to cover 6+ flavors of linux and test the
> binary packaging on the live clusters.
Have you asked for these resources? I don't recall seeing one from bigtop for
anything like this.
> Besides, we have to have the
> privileged access to the build machines to run package installation tests,
Again, have you asked for this? I don't see why enabling your job to run tests
in a short lived instance, or a clean instance could not be provided.
That being said if you have these resources already (where from, might I ask?)
we'd probably ask you to continue to do so - as we have an extremely tight
budget, which we plan for a year in advance at least (as any fiscally sensible
people do) so just throwing up 30 AWS instances is not going to fly very
easily. I'm not saying it can't, but it would involve a lot of conversation and
a budget uplift from the board with good justification.
> etc.
>
> Cos
>
>> On Sat, Aug 08, 2015 at 10:21PM, John D. Ament wrote:
>> Cos,
>> =20
>> Why are these builds not running on ASF infrastructure?
>> =20
>> John
>> =20
>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:49 PM Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> =20
>>> I am not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I don't know of any
>>> better one. So here it is.
>>>
>>> At Bigtop project we have a number of hosts sitting on AWS and running =
> some
>>> intensive CI for the project: building packages, spinning up the cluste=
> rs,
>>> and testing them. For the consistency of the deployment recipes we'd li=
> ke
>>> to
>>> have a CNAME for the CI master to be in the form of bigtop-ci.apache.org
>>> or,
>>> better yet, ci.bigtop.apache.org
>>>
>>> Is is a normal practice for the INFRA to setup such thing? Would be the=
> re
>>> any
>>> concerns about such a schema from the community stand-point?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance
>>> Cos
>
> --F41/6/O0EvKTfNqT
> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
> Content-Description: Digital signature
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iF0EAREIAAYFAlXGhk8ACgkQdkev2dA8ahD1pgD2KuMvVFluRZY5gdkgFaeKXJm6
> SZogizWQyhGMqddrmQEAg4TvK9DITqKlOsG/o9mFY9WUSK0JFOwF8oOvgMAASUQ=
> =MjPa
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --F41/6/O0EvKTfNqT--
