Hi Daniel! Sorry for raining on your parade...
On 16/01/11 19:47, Daniel Golle wrote: > I don't believe there has to be a lot of communication with the > build-bot Why not? I mean, it is not *much* communication bandwidth-wise, neither does it have stringent latency requirements. But building on the same machine that later orchestrates the test makes more sense than distributing the images through the network, no? Wouldn't it be better to not reinvent the wheel, but add the interface to the hardware build testbed to an already existing buildbot? We could vote on a system (I haven't used any, so I'd rather not participate in the vote). What about this buildbot? Is it modular enough so one could write a few scripts / agents / whatever to hook the thing up with the hardware routers? The other end, the link to the SVN, is already there. As is with any such system. > If there is no serious reason against that, I'll start tomorrow on > http://gitorious.org/testbotnik/ I still don't see any reason for starting this from scratch? Your design looks very sound to me, but the thing is small enough to not need any fancy runtime or OOP principles. A configuration file with key/value pairs should do nicely, no? Also, small modules in whatever language the buildbot uses should be fine. What's more, you pretty much exclude people that don't fancy ruby by this. Me for example ;) All the best! Florian _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
