Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [staging] repository: Let's give it a try!
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Let me underline again that [staging] would be no regular repo that would be used by anyone directly. It mainly meant for collecting rebuilds.
However, it would have to be used by anyone wanting to rebuild a package against a new library that has been pushed to [staging]. Therefore, it would need to be mirrored and added to /etc/pacman.conf in our [testing] chroots. (By `our [testing] chroots' I mean the chroots that developers and TUs have been using until now for building packages for [testing].)
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Let me underline again that [staging] would be no regular repo that would be used by anyone directly. It mainly meant for collecting rebuilds.
However, it would have to be used by anyone wanting to rebuild a package against a new library that has been pushed to [staging]. Therefore, it would need to be mirrored and added to /etc/pacman.conf in our [testing] chroots. (By `our [testing] chroots' I mean the chroots that developers and TUs have been using until now for building packages for [testing].)
No, it doesn't need to be mirrored. Developers have always had direct access to this, ask on the developer private list if you don't know the URL. -Dan
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Let me underline again that [staging] would be no regular repo that would be used by anyone directly. It mainly meant for collecting rebuilds.
However, it would have to be used by anyone wanting to rebuild a package against a new library that has been pushed to [staging]. Therefore, it would need to be mirrored and added to /etc/pacman.conf in our [testing] chroots. (By `our [testing] chroots' I mean the chroots that developers and TUs have been using until now for building packages for [testing].)
No, it doesn't need to be mirrored. Developers have always had direct access to this, ask on the developer private list if you don't know the URL.
-Dan
Oh, neat. Can we, TUs, get access to it too? (Unless we already do and I missed it.)
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:40:56 +0300, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Let me underline again that [staging] would be no regular repo that would be used by anyone directly. It mainly meant for collecting rebuilds.
However, it would have to be used by anyone wanting to rebuild a package against a new library that has been pushed to [staging]. Therefore, it would need to be mirrored and added to /etc/pacman.conf in our [testing] chroots. (By `our [testing] chroots' I mean the chroots that developers and TUs have been using until now for building packages for [testing].)
No, it doesn't need to be mirrored. Developers have always had direct access to this, ask on the developer private list if you don't know the URL.
-Dan
Oh, neat. Can we, TUs, get access to it too? (Unless we already do and I missed it.)
ATM there wont be a need to have TUs access this repo. The main reason of excluding it from mirroring is to remove it later when we decide that this idea wasn't that great. We might think about mirroring it later though..its just the db file anyway as the packages will be kept in a pool. The only downside is that nobody should actually use that repo. (by thinking it would similar to Debians experimental) -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:40:56 +0300, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Let me underline again that [staging] would be no regular repo that would be used by anyone directly. It mainly meant for collecting rebuilds.
However, it would have to be used by anyone wanting to rebuild a package against a new library that has been pushed to [staging]. Therefore, it would need to be mirrored and added to /etc/pacman.conf in our [testing] chroots. (By `our [testing] chroots' I mean the chroots that developers and TUs have been using until now for building packages for [testing].)
No, it doesn't need to be mirrored. Developers have always had direct access to this, ask on the developer private list if you don't know the URL.
-Dan
Oh, neat. Can we, TUs, get access to it too? (Unless we already do and I missed it.)
ATM there wont be a need to have TUs access this repo. The main reason of excluding it from mirroring is to remove it later when we decide that this idea wasn't that great. We might think about mirroring it later though..its just the db file anyway as the packages will be kept in a pool. The only downside is that nobody should actually use that repo. (by thinking it would similar to Debians experimental)
-- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
I'm not sure what you mean with `at the moment', but if any rebuild that affects [community] packages goes into [staging], TUs will need access to it so the affected packages can be rebuilt. Also, it would be desirable to immediately have access to the private mirror as this eliminates any delay between the time when new packages get committed to [testing] and the moment they reach the mirrors. Anyway, Ionuț was kind enough to let me know of the URL in #archlinux-tu. Other interested TUs can ask for it in the same channel, I suppose. PS: Package pools sound interesting! :)
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:40:56 +0300, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Let me underline again that [staging] would be no regular repo that would be used by anyone directly. It mainly meant for collecting rebuilds.
However, it would have to be used by anyone wanting to rebuild a package against a new library that has been pushed to [staging]. Therefore, it would need to be mirrored and added to /etc/pacman.conf in our [testing] chroots. (By `our [testing] chroots' I mean the chroots that developers and TUs have been using until now for building packages for [testing].)
No, it doesn't need to be mirrored. Developers have always had direct access to this, ask on the developer private list if you don't know the URL.
-Dan
Oh, neat. Can we, TUs, get access to it too? (Unless we already do and I missed it.)
ATM there wont be a need to have TUs access this repo. The main reason of excluding it from mirroring is to remove it later when we decide that this idea wasn't that great. We might think about mirroring it later though..its just the db file anyway as the packages will be kept in a pool. The only downside is that nobody should actually use that repo. (by thinking it would similar to Debians experimental)
-- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
I'm not sure what you mean with `at the moment', but if any rebuild that affects [community] packages goes into [staging], TUs will need access to it so the affected packages can be rebuilt. Also, it would be desirable to immediately have access to the private mirror as this eliminates any delay between the time when new packages get committed to [testing] and the moment they reach the mirrors.
Pierre seems to have forgotten about community-testing I guess. :) -Dan
On 12 August 2010 02:07, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
Pierre seems to have forgotten about community-testing I guess. :)
-Dan
I don't have a strong resentment against this, but if it can be sorted out soon, we can test the water with the python rebuild. -- GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD
participants (4)
-
Dan McGee
-
Evangelos Foutras
-
Pierre Schmitz
-
Ray Rashif