| 27 May 2024 |
 vcunat | So it probably doesn't make much sense to differentiate if the work will be for x86_64-darwin or aarch64-darwin. | 12:51:19 |
 hexa | if we information is available we might a well expose it | 12:52:15 |
| hexa | * if the information is available we might a well expose it | 12:52:18 |
| hexa | the downside is probably that the code does not look too maintainble 😄 | 12:52:40 |
| hexa | * the downside is probably that the code does not look too maintainable 😄 | 12:52:49 |
| vcunat | I certainly see the rebuild list for all platforms in the "eval" link. | 13:23:24 |
| vcunat | * I certainly see the rebuild list for all four platforms in the "eval" link. | 13:23:32 |
 Lily Foster | if y'all decide on something, i can make a quick PR to update labelling | 13:23:47 |
| Lily Foster | * if y'all decide on something, i can make a quick PR to ofborg to update labelling | 13:25:04 |
| hexa | In reply to @vcunat:matrix.org
Maybe we could do an average over the pair of platforms? the average between two platforms might very well be misleading, e.g. 0 and 1000 -> 500, 0 and 3000 -> 1500 | 13:29:18 |
| hexa | and you'd always have to dig into the list to get the accurate picture, and the list does not necessarily load/render very fast 🙂 | 13:30:00 |
| vcunat | Intuitively I'd want just a single number that estimates the amount of work for Hydra (say, even hours needed if doing nothing else). | 13:30:42 |
| vcunat | But perhaps there are more use cases for this. | 13:31:10 |
| hexa | so what would be a good number you could derive from two linux platforms for example? | 13:32:36 |
| hexa | I think the sum would be much less misleading fwiw | 13:33:20 |
| hexa | and would require less interpretation | 13:33:29 |
| vcunat | Sum might be best. | 13:34:22 |
| vcunat | But just the label name won't provide much understanding of the meaning anyway.
| 13:34:46 |
| vcunat | Like, the fact that two platforms are involved in the "rebuild-linux" label.
| 13:35:15 |
| vcunat | * Like, the fact that two platforms would become involved in the "rebuild-linux" label.
| 13:35:22 |
| vcunat | And switching to sum is problematic in the aspect that typically it will double the value. | 13:36:12 |
| vcunat | So we'd be changing that now. | 13:36:26 |
| vcunat | * Sum might be best, though I'm not sure really. | 13:36:51 |
| hexa | ok, so rebuild-${system} then | 14:00:12 |
| hexa | would probably be the safest migration path, since people are familiar with the rebuild count labels | 14:00:47 |
| hexa | except for maybe that rebuild-linux currently causes up to twice the rebuilds | 14:01:15 |
| hexa | which is why the proposal would make things a bit clearer | 14:01:37 |
| Lily Foster | In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
ok, so rebuild-${system} then i'll make PR then today. do you wanna make labels? | 14:36:05 |
| hexa | gh label create --color "#eeffee" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 0"
gh label create --color "#eeffee" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 1"
gh label create --color "#eeffee" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 1-10"
gh label create --color "#fbca04" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 11-100"
gh label create --color "#fbca04" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 101-500"
gh label create --color "#d93f0b" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 501-1000"
gh label create --color "#b60205" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 1001-2500"
gh label create --color "#b60205" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin: 2501-5000"
gh label create --color "#b60205" "10.rebuild-aarch64-darwin-stdenv"
gh label create --color "#eeffee" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 0"
gh label create --color "#eeffee" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 1"
gh label create --color "#eeffee" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 1-10"
gh label create --color "#fbca04" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 11-100"
gh label create --color "#fbca04" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 101-500"
gh label create --color "#d93f0b" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 501-1000"
gh label create --color "#b60205" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 1001-2500"
gh label create --color "#b60205" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux: 2501-5000"
gh label create --color "#b60205" "10.rebuild-aarch64-linux-stdenv"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 0" "10.rebuild-linux: 0"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 1" "10.rebuild-linux: 1"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 1-10" "10.rebuild-linux: 1-10"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 11-100" "10.rebuild-linux: 11-100"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 101-500" "10.rebuild-linux: 101-500"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 501-1000" "10.rebuild-linux: 501-1000"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 1001-2500" "10.rebuild-linux: 1001-2500"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux: 2501-5000" "10.rebuild-linux: 2501-5000"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-linux-stdenv" "10.rebuild-linux-stdenv"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 0" "10.rebuild-darwin: 0"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 1" "10.rebuild-darwin: 1"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 1-10" "10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 11-100" "10.rebuild-darwin: 11-100"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 101-500" "10.rebuild-darwin: 101-500"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 501-1000" "10.rebuild-darwin: 501-1000"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 1001-2500" "10.rebuild-darwin: 1001-2500"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin: 2501-5000" "10.rebuild-darwin: 2501-5000"
gh label edit --name "10.rebuild-x86_64-darwin-stdenv" "10.rebuild-darwin-stdenv"
| 14:36:15 |
| Lily Foster | oh have you already done them? | 14:36:36 |
