On 1/12/07, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> markwkm@gmail.com wrote:
> > What do you think about setting up the buildfarm clients
> > with the users they are willing to test patches for, as opposed to
> > having the patch system track who is are trusted users? My thoughts
> > are the former is easier to implement and that it allows anyone to use
> > the buildfarm to test a patch for anyone, well each buildfarm client
> > user permitting.
>
> We can do this, but the utility will be somewhat limited. The submitters
> will still have to be known and authenticated on the patch server. I
> think you're also overlooking one of the virtues of the buildfarm,
> namely that it does its thing unattended. If there is a preconfigured
> set of submitters/vetters then we can rely on them all to do their
> stuff. If it's more ad hoc, then when Joe Bloggs submits a spiffy new
> patch every buildfarm owner that wanted to test it would need to go and
> add him to their configured list of patch submitters. This doesn't seem
> too workable.
Ok so it really wasn't much work to put together a SOAP call that'll
return patches from everyone, a trusted group, or a specified
individual. I put together a short perl example that illustrates some
of this: http://folio.dyndns.org/example.pl.txt
How does that look?
Regards,
Mark
