Re: Adding CI to our tree - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Adding CI to our tree
Date
Msg-id 2597660.1644772397@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Adding CI to our tree  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Adding CI to our tree  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> This is exactly why I'm not a huge fan of having ci stuff in the tree.
> It supposes that there's one right way to do a build, but in reality,
> different people want and indeed need to use different options for all
> kinds of reasons. That's the whole value of having things like
> configure and pg_config_manual.h. When we start arguing about whether
> or ci builds should use -DWRITE_READ_PARSE_PLAN_TREES we're inevitably
> into the realm where no choice is objectively better,

Right.  Can we set things up so that it's not too painful to inject
custom build options into a CI build?  I should think that at the
very least one needs to be able to vary the configure switches and
CPPFLAGS/CFLAGS.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: buildfarm warnings
Next
From: Chapman Flack
Date:
Subject: Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT