[Buildbot-devel] Full-Time buildbot developer available...!

[john gale]

On Feb 10, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:

>>>> I'd also like to be able to subscribe a single buildslave to  
>>>> multiple
>>>> buildmasters.
>>>
>>> Out of curiosity, what is the rationale for this ? While I can see  
>>> it
>>> being hard to maintain multiple buildmasters, build slaves are  
>>> cheap,
>>> and allowing them to serve multiple projects just complicates things
>>> without much benefit.
>>
>> Build slaves aren't always cheap.  Depending on what you're  
>> testing, ideally you'd want one machine for each build slave.   
>> Registering multiple build slaves per machine can start running on  
>> each others toes, especially when you're testing system software.
>
> I see, and agree. However, that can already be dealt with on the  
> build master side, i.e. via coordinated scheduling and locking.



But that's my point, making sure the build master knows the status of  
the build slave only occurs once per master control program.  To get  
the benefits of many, many projects running (scheduled, without  
stepping on each others' toes) on a single build slave, they all have  
to be scheduled and locked by one master.  Which then means that you  
run into the original statement of cluttering one master with many  
disparate projects.

I would indeed love to see the ability to have a pool of slaves, that  
can license themselves out to different masters, fully coordinated and  
lockable, so that many teams could implement their own buildbot master  
and share the same slave resources.

	~ john

=================
support the arts!
www.smadness.com

updated October 12, 2005