Hi all,
Allan complained yesterday that ABS is apparently broken. Turns out that most likely it is broken at least since 2016-07-07.
The script received no changes since 2012-09-07 and the main advantage it brings is an easy way to pull all PKGBUILDs. But we also provide public Subversion and Git repositories. Initial svn checkout for community and packages takes less than 3 minutes on my rather slow connection (for European standards); obviously subsequent updates are faster. Full git clone is slow, but shallow one takes ca. 10 seconds (for both).
If someone needs to checkout just one package, svn has sparse checkouts and for git, Dave wrote asp[1]. This brings the question, what is the point of keeping it running?
Bartłomiej
On 25.03.2017 12:24, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
This brings the question, what is the point of keeping it running?
Getting rid of ABS also removes one of the things that need to be adapted when we switch our repos to git or even just the new dbscripts. +1 from my side.
Florian
On 25/03/17 21:24, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
Hi all,
Allan complained yesterday that ABS is apparently broken. Turns out that most likely it is broken at least since 2016-07-07.
The script received no changes since 2012-09-07 and the main advantage it brings is an easy way to pull all PKGBUILDs. But we also provide public Subversion and Git repositories. Initial svn checkout for community and packages takes less than 3 minutes on my rather slow connection (for European standards); obviously subsequent updates are faster. Full git clone is slow, but shallow one takes ca. 10 seconds (for both).
If someone needs to checkout just one package, svn has sparse checkouts and for git, Dave wrote asp[1]. This brings the question, what is the point of keeping it running?
Can our server handle the load of svn/git checkouts? That was the main concern when we moved to SVN many years ago and the reason ABS was kept.
I have been working on and off to include source packages into a pacman database to allow pacman to directly replace these.
Allan
On 25.03.2017 22:19, Allan McRae wrote:
I have been working on and off to include source packages into a pacman database to allow pacman to directly replace these.
Having this in pacman would be the best solution IMHO, but I think we should be fine with svn/git right now. We have a lot more resources than we had back then. We could also set up automatic mirrors on github once we use git or just mirror the repos internally.
Florian
On 03/25/17 at 10:35pm, Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public wrote:
On 25.03.2017 22:19, Allan McRae wrote:
I have been working on and off to include source packages into a pacman database to allow pacman to directly replace these.
Having this in pacman would be the best solution IMHO, but I think we should be fine with svn/git right now. We have a lot more resources than we had back then. We could also set up automatic mirrors on github once we use git or just mirror the repos internally.
+1 for the Github mirror and for dropping abs.
On 2017-03-25 12:24, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
Hi all,
Allan complained yesterday that ABS is apparently broken. Turns out that most likely it is broken at least since 2016-07-07.
The script received no changes since 2012-09-07 and the main advantage it brings is an easy way to pull all PKGBUILDs. But we also provide public Subversion and Git repositories. Initial svn checkout for community and packages takes less than 3 minutes on my rather slow connection (for European standards); obviously subsequent updates are faster. Full git clone is slow, but shallow one takes ca. 10 seconds (for both).
If someone needs to checkout just one package, svn has sparse checkouts and for git, Dave wrote asp[1]. This brings the question, what is the point of keeping it running?
Bartłomiej
Resistance is futile, I will prepare a news draft and changes to infra tomorrow.
Bartłomiej
arch-dev-public@lists.archlinux.org