On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 02:00:51PM +0100, Maxime Gauduin via arch-dev-public wrote:
On Sat, 2022-01-29 at 20:17 +0100, Sven-Hendrik Haase via arch-dev-
This wouldn't really be too much of an issue if we had proper automation. With automation, this exact problem solves itself to a degree. Surely there will still be specific breakages now and then but the bulk of the burden will go away. We'd even be able to support other targets with ease.
However, I realize this will require a lot of upfront infra work before we're there and I'm not sure we should block this proposal on that work.
If we don't eventually get good automation (and packages in git), this kinda problem will keep reoccurring. Sadly I don't really have time to work on this right now though I'd love to.
Sven
We already have 2 working automated build tools, that I know of, Evangelos' and mine [0]. I'm sure we can figure something out fairly quickly, unless we'd rather go with some Gitlab CI now that we have one. It would probably make more sense to go that route, but I've already fitted several Gitlab instances with a Buildbot CI, I find it more flexible and it also works wonders.
I think having buildbot would be more flexible for such an infrastructure then piggy back on the pipeline system for gitlab. It sometimes feels too restrictive being tied to git repositories and buildbot is a *lot* more flexible when it comes to it. It might also be worth a consideration that the build infrastructure would be completely seperate from our git forge. This would make it easier if we want to move VCS/forge in the future. -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16