[Automated-testing] A common place for CI results?

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 06:58:04PM -0400, Carlos Hernandez wrote:
> On 5/15/19 4:33 PM, Dan Rue wrote:

> > This has a few benefits:
> > - Non-opinionated place to hold structured data

Of course structure is opinion :/

> +1
> 
> I like the idea

Me too.

> > The things this leaves me wanting are:
> > - raw data storage. It would be nice if raw data were stored somewhere
> >    permanent in some intermediary place so that later implementations
> >    could happen, and for data that doesn't fit into whatever structure we
> >    end up with.

> If required, we could setup a related table w/ raw data. I believe max cell
> size ~ 100MB per https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/quotas

> However, another approach could be to define the structure version in the
> schema. New fields can be added and left blank for old data.

Versioned structures do make tooling to use the data more difficult to
implement, I think Dan's idea is good especially early on when things
are being tried for the first time.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/automated-testing/attachments/20190516/f95b4fc5/attachment-0001.pgp>