[Vm-dev] [OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm] .appveyor.yml test - try to add [skip appveyor] (#349)

[akgrant43]

> Well shouldn't it work that way? I mean, there are other drawbacks of identifying VMs by commit id (e.g. the need for git hooks).

I'm not sure.  If we introduced a version number or build number there may still be a need to substitute it in to other files, so there may still be a use for the commit hooks.  And event with the other identifier, I wouldn't want to get rid of the CommitHash - it makes it easy as a developer to find the code.


> More importantly, why rebuild all Linux/macOS VMs when only Windows code was modified?

This is a good point, of course.


> I have never expected bleeding edge "releases" on Bintray to be complete, no one really should because they are mainly for development and builds happen to fail from time to time. Stable release builds will still be triggered simultaneously on AppVeyor and Travis. So we should be fine, right?

Implicit in what you're saying is that someone then manually starts a full build for every release candidate.

So, I'm fine with the change you're proposing, it just requires buy-in from the people that are actually responsible for the releases in the various flavours (and thus are responsible for ensuring a full build for the released VM).

It also doesn't completely remove the usefulness of being able to skip building when desired. :-)


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/349#issuecomment-451719955
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20190105/744905cb/attachment.html>