[Nix-dev] Re: Another approach at parallelizing in-build jobs

[Marc Weber]

> That my fear is related to people that may have written bad the Makefiles, and
> that fear makes me simply against the opt-out approach, but I sure favour the
> opt-in.

No matter in which way you look at something. Which is the policy to
opt-out/opt-in packages?

Can we talk about ideas to find out whether there is a solution at all
other than "I trust the comitter that he had a good feeling?"

Talking about either case doesn't make sense unless we also talk about
when to use parallel builds at all. Which information is enough to
opt-in a package?

Because I don't have an answer for that I used a global opt-in and
wanted to use this feature on my computer only while using hydra
binaries.

I put this one question: How do find out whether a package is
trustworthy so that you can use parallel build?

Talk about that please rather than opt-in vs opt-out.

My reasoning was: "opt-out" is less work to make my use cases (testing
while developing only) work.

I'm for a perfect patch. But I don't know how to do it unless we
discuss this topic in depth. That's why I didn't even try to make a
perfect patch.

Marc Weber