[Martin v. Loewis wrote]
>  Brian Warner wrote:
>  > That would work, although to be honest the buildbot is more about repeatable
>  > builds. My first suggestion would be to have two separate Builders, one of
>  > which does incremental builds, the other which does full (from-scratch)
>  > builds.
>  
>  My concern is that then the number of builders would go up from 8 to 16,
>  even though it is just four different machines that we use.

Specifically are you concerned about the readability of the waterfall
page or other things (maintainability or something)? If the former,
perhaps we could get some mileage out of the query args that Brian
mentioned:

    [Brian Warner wrote]
    >  I should mention a feature that you might find useful: you can add
    >  some query arguments to the top-level Waterfall page's URL to
    >  restrict the set of Builders that are displayed. If you append
    >  "?show=full-2.3", you'll wind up with a waterfall display that
    >  only contains the "full-2.3" Builder's column.  Appending
    >  "?show=full-2.3&show=full-2.4" will show two columns, etc. You can
    >  also create multiple Waterfall instances, each with a different
    >  set of "categories", and use that to manage the complexity of
    >  displaying status for lots of Builders. (with the current release
    >  these multiple Waterfalls must all listen on different TCP ports,
    >  unfortunately, but you can always hide this with the
    >  reverse-proxy's URL mapping).


Trent

-- 
Trent Mick
trentm@[...].com
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@[...].org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-dev-ml%40activestate.c
om