PSA: Not every main waterfall config is or should be on the CQ

[Dirk Pranke]

Hi all,

Since this has come up every so often for a long time, and since many people may not understand the rationale, I'll write it down at least here:

There isn't a 1:1 match between CQ build configs and main waterfall configs, and that will likely not change soon. Some of the main waterfall configs are either too slow or break too rarely to make economic sense to put into the CQ. More generally, if a builder can't cycle in under 50 min on average, or if it breaks less than once or twice a month, it probably doesn't make sense for it to be in the CQ.

If a builder is fast enough, and breaks often enough, it probably should be. In some cases, we might not have the capacity to currently support that configuration, but that's something that Ops should be working on fixing.

All of this should be documented somewhere better as well, and it's on my TODO list to do so.

Please let me know if you have any questions or suggestions,

-- Dirk