GitLab Migration (CI heads-up)
ggreif at gmail.com
Sat Dec 22 09:08:19 UTC 2018
(following-up own mail)
This seems resolved too. I have submitted my branch into the main
repo, and now the pipeline is executing :-)
Still, do we want running pipelines for external contributors too?
On 12/22/18, Gabor Greif <ggreif at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> thanks for the explanation, that indeed makes sense. I suspected some
> runaway optimisation, since the GHC seemed to crash on the same small
> set of sources.
> On a related note, even after rebasing to master, the linter of
> ghc/ghc!10 doesn't appear to kick in, blocking (and timing out) the
> test pipeline: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ggreif/ghc/pipelines/428
> It looks like there are no "lint" runners available.
> Cheers and thanks,
> On 12/22/18, Ben Gamari <ben at smart-cactus.org> wrote:
>> Gabor Greif <ggreif at gmail.com> writes:
>>> Hi Ben,
>> Hi Gabor,
>>> I was wondering why my pull request (merely to trigger a bit more of
>>> CI than what I have at my local disposal) was suddenly failing (1),
>>> when it worked in a previous incarnation (2).
>>> It turns out that either CI or the entire tree is broken since (3)
>>> being the last sound one.
>> Indeed CircleCI recently revised their billing policies and consequently
>> we have lost the ability to use the large instance sizes which we were
>> previously using for our builds. Sadly GHC builds do not reliably finish
>> on the instances we still do have access to due to memory and build time
>> constraints. It appears that this may be the cause of the failures in
>> your build (1).
>> This billing change was the reason why I have been moving our CI
>> infrastructure to GitLab. Unfortunately in the chaos it looks like I
>> neglected to forward the ghc-devops thread describing the situation 
>> to ghc-devs. Sorry for the confusion!
>> I'm going to draft a summary email describing the state of the GitLab
>> transition right now.
>> - Ben
More information about the ghc-devs