On 2026-Aug-25, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Well, "growing" could cover a multitude of possibilities. It could mean > there was one and now there are two. Maybe there are lots out there and I at > least just haven't heard of it. But if you want to say that there is a > significant number of people actually contributing here who use it that > would be all the better for some evidence.
For what it's worth, I think a descriptive/declarative mechanism for configuring buildfarm animals would beat the current Perl-code-based system hands down. For instance, if I want to switch an animal from Configure to Meson, I have to essentially redo the whole config from scratch, which is rather a mess. I'd much rather state which features I want to be used, and then have an intermediate layer figure out which command line options must be used. Maybe a Nix flake system would enable something like that without too much development effort. -- Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "I'm impressed how quickly you are fixing this obscure issue. I came from MS SQL and it would be hard for me to put into words how much of a better job you all are doing on [PostgreSQL]." Steve Midgley, http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2008-08/msg00000.php
