[BioRuby] Nightly build testing, was: Broken link on wiki installation page

[Pjotr Prins]

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 01:03:11PM +0100, Peter Cock wrote:
> What I am trying to understand is do all those bits live in many
> different repositories, 

Yes. biogems are individual efforts - we actively encourage that. You
have to understand that the combined biogems are arguably more
important now than the core bioruby project. Though both have their
roles.

> or is there one super repository? And if there isn't a single
> repository, can we create a meta-repository (e.g. using git
> submodules).

git submodules are not that great. I used them for biolib. They are
nice and not nice ;)

Like I wrote, we track repositories through biogems, bio-core and
bio-core-ext. I think you aim to check out the master repositories
(development branch) for testing, right?  So we can write a script to
do just that. I would prefer to track the meta-gems, as well as
the regular biogems. Test results can be listed on biogems.info.

Would it work to clone all repositories in one directory, and run
both combined and individual tests? We can do the scripting of that.

> > Also, it looks like the testing environment should be hosted in a
> > ready made VM image. I can create a CloudBioLinux flavour for that.
> > Once we know what to install. I will also want tests for biolib_hpc,
> > when that gets production ready (btw). It is a long standing wish on
> > my end to get this sorted.
> 
> Perhaps I have misunderstood you, but if all the build slaves
> run the tests via the same VM image, there is no diversity.
> For Biopython we deliberately want inhomogeneous setups
> for our buildslaves to try and cover the variety of potential
> setups our end users will have.

Different VMs can be created. For each target one. I am primarily
interested in a Debian VM - as that covers >80% of users in
bioinformatics. I am not saying it replaces your installations - but
it would certainly add to it.

Pj.