Hello everybody, I hope I can contribute somehow too. I have one i686 machine running Arch, but I think it would be easier to test on a VM. And I don't mind if you decide to use github or something else. On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Félix Faisant <xcodexif@xif.fr> wrote:
Hi list,
Le 2 févr. 2017 à 00:01, Erich Eckner <arch@eckner.net> a écrit :
we took a step forward and now we have: - a name: archlinux32 - a domain: archlinux32.org - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ? I've nothing against though.
I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this has to be final.
Of course. Maybe we could just wait a day or two for interested people to give their opinion before going further.
Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure closer to Arch dev's one ?
In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for tickets, discussions, and the like.
Well, it's quite easy to setup and would not be difficult to maintain. I think it's more a question of efficiency. And indeed github could be appropriate for such low volume of work. But I don't use github so I can't tell.
Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make more sense to copy from them.
Even if the vast majority of PKGBUILDs and tool would be kept synced with Arch's ones ? Again, I didn't look close enough to archlinuxarm to tell...
so we can brainstorm and sort out details.
Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?
true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for that - at least to start with.
I think it's appropriated for per-package discussions or anything like that, but for the moment, it's more a general/technical discussion rather than a detailed one.
Or with other words: City-busz just put a proposal for a build-system on: https://github.com/archlinux32/builder/wiki/Build-system (it's readable for anyone, I hope)
Great. Seems good for me. Could we precise the signing strategy ?
Moreover, as building is done on a single machine, we thus need a decent one. I'm not really aware of the needed power. What would be the frequency on builds ?
Finally, it's quite obvious we will keep separate repos, right ?
---- Félix Faisant - PGP : ce67 00ae c4c3 2446 032c f89a 4e4f a7af f464 8355
_______________________________________________ arch-ports mailing list arch-ports@archlinux.org https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports