Re: [BuildStream] Switching to buildbox-run for local builds

[Tristan Van Berkom <tristan vanberkom codethink co uk>]

Hi,

On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 22:41 +0200, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> Hi Chandan,
>
> On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 20:58 +0100, Chandan Singh wrote:
> > Hi Jürg,
[...]
> > I'd be in favor of keeping the bwrap backend around for a little
> > while. This is mostly to allow for a smoother fallback in case there
> > are any issues, and for performance comparisons. I understand that one
> > could fall back to an older version, but it'll be slightly nicer to be
> > able to compare master branches in both cases. This is not a big issue
> > but given that it doesn't cost us much to keep it for a while, I'd be
> > in favor of that.
> >
> > Time-wise, maybe we can give it a month or so?
>
> Sure, we can keep it around for a bit. I will also add a CI job to keep
> testing bwrap until we remove the code, of course.

I would have been in favor of a full replacement earlier than later,
but have no problems with keeping it around for a bit if Chandan wants
to (for benchmarking or other reasons).

I only request that we make the new BuildBox sandboxing implementation
the default sandbox right away.

We might also remove the `tests-buildbox-run` CI job right away, or
make it a `tests-bubblewrap` for this interim period, possibly allowing
the bubblewrap test run to fail.

Cheers,
    -Tristan