build progress bar

[Clemens Lang]

Hi,

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 11:10:50AM +0100, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> > The idea was that the buildbot would update the database
> > automatically after each build.

Not only, because using only the buildbot would not give us any
information about variants, which could significantly change the number
of printed lines.

> I just closed the ticket window but I distinctly remember reading
> something about users opting in to provide the information. Maybe that
> applied only to ports not handled by the bots.

No, my idea originally was to do that for all ports, even though most
people probably would not build ports already built by our buildbots
(but then the line count wouldn't matter for them anyway, unless the
port was not distributable).

> The one advantage of letting bots define this information is that
> you'd get OS version specific counts which is probably necessary
> anyway.

We could always include the OS version in a request, e.g. using a hash
of OS version + separator + port name + variants.

> But I don't really like the idea that each `port build` would query a
> remote server; I'd much prefer for the database to be installed
> locally and updated through `port selfupdate`.

Syncing such a database via selfupdate may leave you in a
chicken-and-egg situation where at the time the portindex is generated
and you learn about the new port, line number info is not available most
of the time. In a crowd-sourced (or buildbot-based) approach, I would
expect line number information to show up a couple of hours after a port
has appeared in portindex, by which time quite a few people may already
have installed it.

I agree that privacy is a concern, which is why this should be opt-in.
Maybe we could make the requests opaque enough so that it's not clear
which port is being installed, or just update a database of all ports
before an attempted installation.

-- 
Clemens