From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2103 invoked by alias); 19 Dec 2017 10:12:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 2092 invoked by uid 89); 19 Dec 2017 10:12:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=duty, cooperating, stake, survive X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 10:12:09 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F6A116E6D; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 05:12:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id EILrUYvRZix5; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 05:12:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 019D2116E4C; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 05:12:08 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5E9F8809B4; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:12:03 +0400 (+04) Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 10:12:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Sergio Durigan Junior Cc: David Edelsohn , Yao Qi , GDB Patches , Edjunior Machado Subject: Re: [BuildBot] Notifications disabled for Debian-s390x-* and Fedora-ppc64*-* builders Message-ID: <20171219101203.2gk2uv32bpvxnm2y@adacore.com> References: <87d13g6r5t.fsf@redhat.com> <878te46pk4.fsf@redhat.com> <874loro9yf.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <874loro9yf.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-SW-Source: 2017-12/txt/msg00417.txt.bz2 > Anyway, I can't believe I'm having to explain these things again here. > So this will be my last post on this subject. It seems to me that the root of the discussion comes from conflicting expectations as to who should be caring about what. In particular, should the entire responsibility of caring for a given platform be transfered over to "the community" as soon as a build bot is contributed? The GDB project being a volunteer-based community-driven project, a port, and the associated resources, can only survive if there is a group of people with time and motivation to match both the port and the available resources. When resources are put in place for those platforms, and those resources fail to be useful, the people to turn to for answers are those who pushed for them to be put in place. Asking the community in general to be responsible does not seem like an attainable goal, nor is it attractive to me. That is not to say that the community is entirely care free either. I think we see nearly every day people cooperating on subjects that do not directly matter to them, and as far as I am concerned going well beyond the call of duty. But there has to be a reasonable limit to what we ask of people to help for other platforms. Contributing hardware is not a fire-and-forget thing. For the issues with the buildbots, there has to be someone who has a stake in those platforms, and willing to drive the effort in getting those back in shape. These are the people we should turn to, not the person who provides the service for those who want to. And if there are none and the resource becomes a nuisance rather than a help, then the logical answer is to remove it. If anything, what this discussion leads me to, is that the lessons learned here is that we should be clearer about an identified group who would be responsible for what before a new buildbot is being put in place, and also about what level of "service" can be expected from the people maintaining the infrastructure, vs what concerns the platforms the buildbots build and test. Hopefully this will reconcile the idea of silencing a couple of buildbots with the idea of calling for additional participation. For me, there is no conflict in adding buildbots while silencing others if there is a fully motivated group beind some, and not enough behind others. And finally, I felt the attacks on Sergio were really no way to communicate with someone we're supposed to cooperate with. I hope we all understand that, and we all know that there are other ways to express contradicting opinions that are just as effective and may even gain you a bit of extra goodwill. -- Joel