ndmitchell at gmail.com
Fri Jan 29 11:58:28 EST 2010
>> BTW: What's up with the buildbots? The daily reports haven't been very
>> informative lately. Is this fallout from the monk -> abbot move?
> We decided not to try to stick with buildbot - it isn't suitable, in that it
> can't cope with dropped connections, and it would be too hard to fix it.
> There isn't a good alternative that we could find, so after due
> consideration we've decided to try making a replacement in Haskell. It will
> be pretty minimal, but it'll be clean and it'll do exactly what we need,
> plus we'll be able to use it for automatic remote validation of patches on
> multiple machines.
I've got buildbot running reasonably reliably, but writing
configuration files in Python is a little annoying as I don't really
know what I'm doing. If you were to make your version of buildbot
decoupled from GHC, and ideally configurable in a similar manner to
XMonad (a library with which you roll your own buildbot, usually in a
couple of lines), then I would consider switching.
More information about the Cvs-ghc