4 ms·
Yea, this seems overcomplicated for something that can easily be smacked into a .travis.yml file with simple syntax. Dream result would be what happened with R
by rurounijones 13y ago
Yea, this seems overcomplicated for something that can easily be smacked into a .travis.yml file with simple syntax.
Dream result would be what happened with RVM and RBenv merging their simple "select ruby version" files in that Travis, CircleCi, Jenkins etc. all agreed on a generic .build.yml file syntax and we could just use that.
- arohner 13y agoWhile a standard .build.yml file sounds nice, I'm not sure we understand the problem well enough to figure out what the optimal syntax would look like. This matters because the syntax has large implications for 1) how simple your build process is 2) how much overhead your CI system can take care of, for you. For example, at Circle, we're still experimenting with yml syntax for user-specified parallelization commands. Each different syntax we've looked at has different implications for what kinds of problems are simple, and what kinds of problems are expressible, using the syntax. So yes, standards, but not yet :-)