From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12BDE3857038 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2023 12:26:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 12BDE3857038 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1689683214; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=Wdmj5U4ckOTaW7OIDl0ufbz2rxm5tP2VpYGtuO416RQ=; b=LglfWZHPi2I3argvzSpp0cISXANanqeVJqI+qPtqLGv5DdeRyTxdv2ckoQSyx6PtJOZKGR PePs6iUWC20Fu7gYRqatV9LTitBgi42ZyECWd/cwndK0HAOlHOis3GFJXV56mH8O05fkH5 fa1St2DpKY5wD28InxP70A2m9YnpVS4= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (66.187.233.73 [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-128-uwSUgZD9ONqbWTEs1Lhs2A-1; Tue, 18 Jul 2023 08:26:51 -0400 X-MC-Unique: uwSUgZD9ONqbWTEs1Lhs2A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D453A3844FA0; Tue, 18 Jul 2023 12:26:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.45.226.176]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65A1D40C206F; Tue, 18 Jul 2023 12:26:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 36ICQkLZ4168717 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:26:47 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 36ICQiF94168714; Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:26:44 +0200 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:26:44 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Siddhesh Poyarekar Cc: Konstantin Ryabitsev , Florian Weimer , "Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha" , "Carlos O'Donell" , Joseph Myers , "Ryan S. Arnold" , Paul Eggert , Maxim Kuvyrkov , Andreas Schwab Subject: Re: Core Toolchain Infrastructure - Services for glibc Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <45e98807-908f-0968-b6fe-5dbb0af265b1@redhat.com> <87ttu6oh9j.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <20230714-card-radium-prow-27d2f1@meerkat> <2b743481-4dc3-07a1-fe65-a32a9d1df09a@gotplt.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2b743481-4dc3-07a1-fe65-a32a9d1df09a@gotplt.org> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 07:47:37AM -0400, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > On 2023-07-14 11:34, Konstantin Ryabitsev via Libc-alpha wrote: > > > Can we keep using the AdaCore hooks? Or would they have to run on the > > > side somehow? Who is going to implement changes to the AdaCore scripts? > > > > This is the main point of contemplation -- we do not currently support custom > > hooks on the server side: > > > > - they tend to significantly slow down pushes > > - they run extensive codebases with the same permissions as the owner of the > > repositories, significantly increasing security risks > > > > Our recommendation was to move all CI tasks to a system that is better suited > > for it. For example, CI can run on a patchwork system and the pre-commit hook > > can then check that each commit matches a patchwork entry that passed CI. > > This would mean porting AdaCore hooks to a patchwork trybot. This would be > an acceptable solution for glibc, but I'm not sure how useful this would be > on the whole since gcc doesn't use patchwork as extensively at the moment. > Also, we need to figure out who's going to do this. It is definitely not acceptable for gcc, we strongly rely on server side pre-commit hooks for various different tasks. Jakub