From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50313)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@redhat.com>) id 1VOQzu-0005TI-SQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:41:47 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@redhat.com>) id 1VOQzq-0007jr-3q
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:41:42 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8023)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@redhat.com>) id 1VOQzp-0007jl-Sc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:41:38 -0400
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:41:33 +0200
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20130924114133.GE27882@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
References: <1379952450-29640-1-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1379952450-29640-1-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/0] .travis and minor compile fixes
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: alex.bennee@linaro.org
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 05:07:27PM +0100, alex.bennee@linaro.org wrote:
> Given I found a couple of issues while doing this I think this is
> useful alongside the existing buildbot efforts. It allows developers
> to run simple smoke-tests without access to the buildbot
> infrastructure (but of course needing github/travis access, free for
> FLOSS projects). I can see further development possibilities in the
> future, one example would be a tree that auto-generates branches with
> testing results for each patch series as they come into the mailing
> list.

This is looking very interesting.  Buildbot is centralized and can be
hard to debug.  As a result not many people triage and fix configuration
issues.

Travis CI allows individual developers to modify the build
configuration.  This is much more friendly.

Can you explain the limitations of Travis CI?  For example, does it
start costing money at some point?

Stefan