You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently we are requiring MinGW tests to pass on AppVeyor. Almost nobody will use MinGW builds if regular MSVC builds work fine. So it should be on the onus of the few people caring about MinGW to ensure that the build chain works on those platforms.
There is a tendency to inflate the number of different configurations in our CI matrices. Not only it makes builds longer and adds delays (see how long you have to wait before you get a CI result on AppVeyor), but it's of dubious utility. I'm not sure it serves the project's general interest.
Currently we are requiring MinGW tests to pass on AppVeyor. Almost nobody will use MinGW builds if regular MSVC builds work fine. So it should be on the onus of the few people caring about MinGW to ensure that the build chain works on those platforms.
Example here, apparently the uriparser library doesn't build on MinGW:
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/pitrou/arrow/build/job/t64xwyj2axhl1jgr
There is a tendency to inflate the number of different configurations in our CI matrices. Not only it makes builds longer and adds delays (see how long you have to wait before you get a CI result on AppVeyor), but it's of dubious utility. I'm not sure it serves the project's general interest.
Rant off ;)
Reporter: Antoine Pitrou / @pitrou
Note: This issue was originally created as ARROW-4720. Please see the migration documentation for further details.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: