In terms of hardware needed, for tier-1 support, the smallest platform we support is macOS ARM, for which we have 36 machines. There we abuse the fact that Android also tests the ARM support, and x86 macOS tests a lot of the macOS support, to get away with a much reduced set of tests. It makes more sense to treat it as tier-3, have someone external set up a CI that monitors mozilla-central, and run builds/tests off of that, then file bugs if something is broken. (This seems to work well enough for a lot of Linux/BSD like platforms)
Bug 1754959 Comment 9 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
In terms of hardware needed, for tier-1 support, the smallest platform we support is macOS ARM, for which we have 36 machines. There we abuse the fact that Android also tests the ARM support, and x86 macOS tests a lot of the macOS support, to get away with a much reduced set of tests. ( A core platform like 64-bit Linux can spawn 2000+ machines: https://hg.mozilla.org/ci/ci-configuration/file/tip/worker-pools.yml#l1868) It makes more sense to treat it as tier-3, have someone external set up a CI that monitors mozilla-central, and run builds/tests off of that, then file bugs if something is broken. This seems to work well enough for a lot of Linux/BSD like platforms, i.e. you're piggy-backing off of the similarities to x86 64-bit Linux, and I think we have no PPC-JIT, so that can't break to begin with?