> On Sep 12, 2016, at 7:46 AM, Rainer Müller <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2016-09-12 04:17, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> { >> "workers": { >> "10.5_ppc": { >> "base": "" >> }, >> "10.5_ppc_legacy": { >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.6_x86_64": { >> "base": "", >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.6_x86_64_legacy": { >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.6_i386": { >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.6_i386_legacy": { >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.7_x86_64": { >> "base": "", >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.7_x86_64_legacy": { >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.8_x86_64": { >> "base": "", >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.8_x86_64_legacy": { >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.9_x86_64": { >> "base": "", >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.10_x86_64": { >> "base": "", >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.11_x86_64": { >> "base": "", >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "10.12_x86_64": { >> "base": "", >> "ports": "" >> }, >> "master": { >> "docs-guide": "", >> "docs-www": "" >> } >> } >> } >> >> >> >> There are currently too many places in master.cfg that have knowledge of >> which worker runs on which platform. I'd like to get all of that information >> confined to the config file. > > This list would be based on OS X installations, not on the function the > buildslaves serve.
Ok, then it could be inverted, with the top-level keys being base, ports, ... > Maybe we should split the list of builders between > those tied to a machine and those that could run anywhere? > > My intention was that the builders "docs-guide" and "docs-www" can use > the same slave. I do not see a need to use separate buildslave instances > for them. That will make it easier to just add new builders for more > tasks (for example portindex2sql or generating a web version of our port > help/man pages). > > The configuration for "ports" has become special, as we make the > assumption of a 1:1 mapping between builders and buildslaves. _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
