x/build: build.golang.org dashboard with “show only first-class ports” checked displays more than just first-class ports #27689
Comments
|
I can fix the discrepancy, but I'll need the decision of which are to be considered first-class vs not. Here's the current first-class port list from build.golang.org in text form: darwin/386:
darwin/amd64:
darwin/arm:
darwin/arm64:
freebsd/386:
freebsd/amd64:
freebsd/arm:
linux/386:
linux/amd64:
linux/arm:
linux/arm64:
linux/mips:
linux/mipsle:
linux/ppc64:
linux/ppc64le:
linux/s390x:
windows/386:
windows/amd64:
windows/arm:
race:
|
dmitshur
added
the
NeedsDecision
|
Change https://golang.org/cl/149606 mentions this issue: |
|
Change https://golang.org/cl/202197 mentions this issue: |
This change updates the GOARCH/GOOS discussion at the top of the "Installing Go from source" document to better reflect the current status. In particular: - The GOARCH list now focuses on simply listing the supported architectures, with no notes about their supposed "maturity", since the same GOARCH can be mature on a GOOS and not so mature on another. - Outdated notes about some archs being new and "not well-exercised" have been removed in favour of a following list of which ports are first class. - The list of supported OS has been updated (added: AIX, Illumos), and sorted in alphabetical order. - A note about the runtime support being the same for all ARCHS, "including garbage collection and efficient array slicing and" etc etc has been removed, since it doesn't seem particularly relevant in a "install from source" instruction page, and it's likely a leftover from the time this doc page was the landing place for new people and it felt the need to "sell" Go. Updates #27689 Fixes #35009 Change-Id: Ic4eca91dca3135adc7bed4fe00b4f157768f0e81 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/202197 Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
|
/cc @toothrot In #38874 (comment), you said:
Based on that analysis, I understand that the "show only first-class ports" displaying more ports than are listed at https://golang.org/wiki/PortingPolicy#first-class-ports is simply a UI bug. If that's right, I understand we should be able to move this issue into NeedsFix state with the goal of fixing the UI bug on build.golang.org. Do you agree? Or do you think there is more that needs to be decided here? |
|
Great! I'll update this issue to reflect the latest state. CC @findleyr FYI. |
dmitshur
changed the title
dmitshur
added
NeedsFix
|
Change https://go.dev/cl/419274 mentions this issue: |
When I check “show only first-class ports” on https://build.golang.org/#short, the list of matching builders is still quite long:
I had assumed that it would be restricted to the list of ports on https://golang.org/wiki/PortingPolicy#first-class-ports, but in fact that list is much, much shorter:
To avoid confusion, they should be made consistent: if the ports in the builder really are first-class, they should be listed on (or linked from) the wiki page, and if they aren't, they should be filtered out of the dashboard view.
(Discovered via #27686 (comment).)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: