[Buildbot-devel] database-backed status/scheduler-state project

[Ben Hearsum]

On 2009-09-08, at 2:20 PM, Brian Warner wrote:
>
>> At least, not unless you're willing to break whatever third-party  
>> code
>> is relying on the API. I would definitely want to avoid this. The  
>> idea
>> of actively seeking it out is almost painful. :)
>
> We could take this road, and put a warning sticker on the db schema  
> that
> says "subject to change, you take responsibility for updating anything
> that you write that touches this, we will not bend over backwards to
> retain compatibility with your apps". Or we could take the other one,
> with a granite plaque that says "we promise to never ever change this,
> use it with confidence". Or something in between.
>
> I guess I'm (currently) comfortable with the warning sticker approach,
> under the theory that the minority of users who need to build these
> sorts of tools (and are willing to get their hands dirty) will also be
> willing+able to pay attention to the schema changes from one release  
> to
> the next. Most users won't be aware of the db.
>

I think this is totally reasonable, and to be expecting from a piece  
of software that hasn't claimed to hit 1.0 yet. Despite being integral  
to many, it's still Use At Your Own Risk IMHO. And as you've stated  
below, there are comparable things that have happened elsewhere in the  
code base. I certainly don't think the first release with this would  
be the right time to freeze the interface.

> Taking this road will cause a certain amount of fear: unwillingness to
> upgrade to newer buildbot versions because some local customization
> might break. There is a similar issue with the internals of  
> BuildSteps:
> several sites are stuck on buildbot-0.7.6 or older (several years  
> out of
> date) because they're unwilling/unable to take the time to update  
> their
> custom steps to the current code, or at least they're afraid of what
> will happen.