The goal needs some clarification. Is it to create two separate build stacks to reduce conflict between the two types of builds? Is it just to display the build of the one-and-only stack in a more convenient layout?

Maintaining two separate build stacks is easy. Some readily identified notation wrt the bNNN would need to be specified so that users didn't accidentally think they were using one vs the other; say bNNN vs tNNN . This is the model used in old BB but Mario Juric has said he wanted a single stack for all tyes of builds.

Maintaining a single build stack used by two builders would involve a Buildbot blocking lock to ensure that only one Buildbot could be active at a time - even though lsstsw does maintain its own lock.

I agree that a single stack for all builds of a given product (including git-change, triggered, nightly, and weekly) is desirable. I would have thought that the eups lock would be sufficient to handle this, but using BuildBot locks is fine.