On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 01:31:12PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 06/11/2018 01:13 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
> >Well, all the free CIs like Travis and Appveyor do it this way. You
> >don't have to *use* it just because the .yml files are in the source
> >tree. But you have to have the .yml files in the source tree in order
> >to use these CIs. It'd be nice to be able to point somewhere else for
> >them, but whatever, that's not something we get much choice in at this
> >time.
>
> That's not true, at least for Appveyor (can't speak about travis - I have no
> first hand experience). For appveyor, you can supply a custom appveyor.yml
> file, which can be a complete URL. In fact, if you use a plain git source as
> opposed to one of the managed git services it supports, you have to do it
> that way - it ignores an appveyor.yml in your repo. I found this out the
> very hard way over the last few days, and they very kindly don't warn you at
> all about this.
OK, that's.. nice, maybe, I guess, but I'd still want version control
for these yml files -- why not have them in-tree? I'd rather have them
in-tree unless there's a good reason not to have them there.
In other projects I definitely find it better to have these files
in-tree.
Nico
--
