[PATCH] D114325: Add a best practice section on how to configure a fast builder

[Philip Reames via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

reames added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/docs/HowToAddABuilder.rst:154-155
+
+As mentioned above, we generally have a strong preference for
+builders which can build every commit as they come in.  This section
+includes best practices and some recommendations as to how to achieve
----------------
reames wrote:
> rengolin wrote:
> > dblaikie wrote:
> > > do we have any builders that achieve this consistently (I wouldn't think so, given the resources required)? Maybe worth rephrasing if it's  not actually achievable/achieved generally to something more in line with the practical reality?
> > > 
> > > If this document is more aspirational/trying to set a fairly new (albeit good, but perhaps not feasible?) direction - maybe it'd be more suitable in a different form/forum?
> > I don't think we have many, if any, but I interpreted it as "preference" and "best practices", not that we don't accept others. I agree we shouldn't be discouraging people to set buildbots if they can't follow these guidelines.
> As noted in the top level comment, we have a bunch of builders which do keep up building every commit.  
> 
> This is aspirational, but only in the sense that a new builder which can't meet this bar has to explain why it's still worthwhile having as a notifying builder.  We may accept it, but the burden of justification is definitely on the bot owner.  
> 
> The main glide path I see - which we need better infrastructure for - is allowing "small" (2-3) commit batches as a graceful fallback when fully keeping up isn't practical.  
Ok, let me walk my last comment back a bit.

As written, this is a best practice.  It *does not* require any higher burden of justification for new bots, and there's nothing in the document which currently frames it that way.  (Or at least, if there is, the wording is a mistake and I'll fix that.)

Longer term, I *do* think we should be rejecting build bots which can't demonstrate a worthwhile tradeoff between benefit to single config and community impact.  However, that needs a lot of broader discussion first.   IMO, we have several today which do not justify their existence.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D114325/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D114325